A good portion of mankind, and a substantial portion of Americans, disagree with you. Some of us, particularly those of us who are conservative by nature, do not believe that the government has the right to enact laws to protect us against ourselves.
Why would you cut out the portion of the Declaration of Independence where the Founders established the fact that all men are created equal?
Could it be because you are arguing that some are not?
I missed nothing from that document…
Luis Gonzalez - 2003
Nor did you miss the opportunity for a red herring. Here's the relevant passage again…
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Thomas Jefferson - 1776
While all men are indeed created equal, not all behaviors are equal. The error you're making is in the idea that homosexuals are defined by what kind of people they are, rather than in what type of perversion they engage.
Sodomy laws do not punish people for being created differently, but for how they behave.
The Constitution does not delegate the right to regulate sexual activity in any degree to the Federal government. From Amendment IX we know that the Founders recognized rights beyond those specifically enumerated in the Constitution and the ensuing Amendments to it. One of those rights is the right to privacy, and yet another right, one that protects us against unreasonable search and seizure, makes anti-sodomy laws ridiculous, in light of the fact that sex in public is prohibited everywhere.
Luis Gonzalez - 2003
Something else you missed…
"Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least."
Thomas Jefferson - 1778
Even if the punishments are harsh by today's standards, Jefferson clearly didn't believe that sodomites were protected in their behavior by an unenumerated right of privacy. Nor did the Supreme Court in the 1986 Georgia decision. Regulating sodomy remains a prerogative of the States, and only a gross abuse of judicial power by the SCOTUS would hold otherwise.
Two people having consensual sex is the equivalent of consensual machete fighting?
Luis Gonzalez - 2003
Jefferson again, from the same document…
Whosoever committeth murder by way of duel, shall suffer death by hanging; and if he were the challenger, his body, after death, shall be gibbeted.
Thomas Jefferson - 1778
Not quite the same, but you can see that like consenting sodomites, consenting duelists are not "created equal… endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" as sodomites and duelists, in the view of the Founder who enunciated the principle.
Do you now, or have you ever engaged in the act of sodomy with your spose or lover?
"Quoted from Thomas Jefferson's Autobiography, Public Papers: CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS.
Section XIV. Whosoever shall be guilty of rape, polygamy, or sodomy with man or woman, shall be punished; if a man, by castration, a woman, by boring through the cartilege of her nose a hole of one half inch in diameter at the least."
If you have engaged in sodomy--and you are going to have a truly difficult time convincing me, or anyone else for that matter, that you have never engaged in either sexual activity which defines "sodomy" with either a lover, or a spouse--then you are equally as guilty as homosexuals by Jefferson's definition, and you qualify as a sodomite yourself.
"Sodomy laws do not punish people for being created differently, but for how they behave."
Not in the case of Texas and other States where engaging in the act of sodomy is criminalized for some, and permitted for others, I don't recall either the Bible, or Thomas Jefferson saying that sodomy was OK with someone of the opposite sex, as a matter of fact, in the quote you yourself provided, Jefferson explicitly denounces these actions "with man or woman".
Laws need to apply equally, to all citizens if we are to avoid the sorts of challenges being routinely raised by gay activists. If State legislatures enact Laws directed at controlling the behavior of one specific segment of society, these laws will be brought to Court on Constitutional grounds, and they will continue to fall on Constitutional grounds. As one law is challenged and that challenge upheld, the next law will be challenged. Our obsession with involving the government in the act of condemning the private behavior of those whose lifestyle choices we do not approve of, will bring about the victory of those we wish to condemn.
If you want to make sodomy illegal, then make it illegal for everyone and quit giving the gay lobby something to wave around and shout out "discrimination".
By the way, nice try at diverting from the true point of the Declaration, I am not buying into it.
"Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"...the pursuit of happiness. While engaging in homosexual behavior may not be your idea of pursuing happiness, it is to a homosexual. That you don't believe that is really of very little consequence to the law.
Do I believe that homosexuality is a sin in the Eyes of God?
Yes I do.
Do I believe that the government should be involved in deciding whether two men (or two women) sharing an apartment requires scrutiny by the authorities?
No.
The actions/behavior of homosexuals affects no one other than themselves, or at least no more than the actions of single welfare mothers who indiscriminately engage in unprotected sex, and give birth to half a dozen welfare babies, on their way to contracting one of many deadly STD's that are out there right now.