What the ---?? Did you read my post carefully? Please re-read my post agagin and tell me what you disagree with.
From post #7:
Because their unnatural, sickening depravity, which has throughout history been condemned (usually with death), symbolizes liberation from the laws of God. And this is universal religious law, not only Christian, but Judaic, even Islam in the Koran, Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Sikh.I disagree with underpinning condemnation of an unnatural sex act with universal religious law. Universal religious law also condemns the inter-religious and inter-racial relationships I mentioned.
If, for example, your objection to homosexual acts is based on Leviticus, then please explain to me which other parts of Leviticus should or should not be law in your state, or across the United States of America?
And did I mention race??
No, I did since it was obviously absent from your consideration of the ramifications in the topic being discussed.
Please be specific here - what are you actually saying?
If homosexual acts and/or relationships should be illegal, and enforceably so, there should be a better argument than - "ick" - or that it goes against some percentage of the citizenry's mores, or amalgamation of religious beliefs. That's a distinguishing characteristic from our social structure than, for example, an Islamist one.
What is the cost to our society in medical terms by not prosecuting homosexuality? (numbers of new diseases, numbers that become ill, $$ in government/insurance programs spent)
What is the cost to our society in social/legal acceptance? (property rights, inheiritance, extended legal and medical coverage, tax revenues, etc.)
There are arguments addressing these issues and others. However, the only ones put forward by conservatives tend to be - "ick", against MY religion and slippery slope. Obviously that's not winning the argument and does not even convince me that those hold the moral high ground.