[tdadams]

It's when someone resorts to absurdity like this that you can be sure they're losing the argument. I assume you feel the anti-smoking laws in NY or LA are perfectly fine? How do you reconcile support for such big-government/nanny-state laws as a conservative?

[longtermmemmory]

Its not unconstitutional for a state to prohibit smoking. It a state or municipal issue for the legislature. The fact that the state of Texas can prohibit homosexual soddomy isa issue for the state of Texas legislature.

I did not say I agreed with that law, only that the law is valid. It was you who analogized smoking addiction and obesity to homosexuality. As behavioral examples, I addressed the fact that as behaviors they can be regulated. As behaviors they are undesriable. As behaviors we discourage our children from engaging in those behaviors, REGARDLESS of the law.

You have also refused to adress the protection of children. You have ignored examples of groups like Glsen and Glad directly ecouraging teenagers to experince homosexual sex. This is not appropriate conduct. It is indefensible.

You have further ignored the open hostility of homosexuals to any referendum which adresses homosexual special rights. The citizens of colorado passed a referendum but the homosexual groups had hissy fits. Citizens place a referendum on the miami ballots but the homosexuals run to court to prevent a public vote. This is no reason or need to create a special civil rights catagory for homosexual behavior. There is no constitutional right to be obese, there is no constitutional right to be a smoker, there is no constitutional right impose homosexual acceptance/tollerance/experimentation on children.

BTW Texas has a seperate statute which mandates the teaching that homosexuality is an unacceptable lifestyle. Its not part of the supreme court case.