[xzins]

The majority determined that the definition of adultery requires sexual intercourse. The judges who disagreed said adultery should be defined more broadly to include other extramarital sexual activity.

Aha, now you can let the ecusa know that bishop vicki-gene was not living in sin. Unbelievable.

Script & Dr.E, if female/female cannot be adultery because it isn't sexual intercourse, then sexual intercourse must = male/female coitus. Therefore, male to male is also not sexual intercourse seeing that it is lacking exactly one vagina. Two observations: (1) If you cannot commit adultery then you obviously cannot be married; (2) If you cannot be having sexual intercourse, then the best description of this act is as it's always been....sodomy.

[scripter]

There you go, bringing logic into the discussion.

[knak]

your post bears repeating

[George W. Bush]

if female/female cannot be adultery because it isn't sexual intercourse, then sexual intercourse must = male/female coitus. Therefore, male to male is also not sexual intercourse seeing that it is lacking exactly one vagina. Two observations: (1) If you cannot commit adultery then you obviously cannot be married; (2) If you cannot be having sexual intercourse, then the best description of this act is as it's always been....sodomy.

Impeccable logic.

However, you are obviously unqualified to sit on the bench since you evidently believe words have assigned and compelling legal definitions.