That's your rationalization for trashing the Constitution through judicial legislation? Pathetic.
The same was true of sodomy -- "the crime that dare not speak its name". The "liberation" of homosexuals from the constraints of law that began in 1969 and continues today is just the latest battle in the ongoing Culture War.
Ten years from now, when Christian parents are fighting to keep their pre-teen boys from having to attend the mandatory Man-Boy Touch Encounter "classes" at the local schoolhouse, the same people who support the normalization of sodomy today will be supporting the normalization of "transgenerational love". I can almost hear them now, arguuing that "differences in age are merely arbitrary distinctions", that "no one's rights are infringed by the act of two males of different ages having loving sex in the privacy of a Touch Encounter booth" and that "the only opponents of sex between adults and children are religious fanatics who wish to impose a Taliban-like theocracy on freedom-loving Americans".
Of course, long before things get to that point this religious fanatic will be either sitting in some re-education center pumped full of Happy Juice, or I'll be dead -- but you see my point.
Luis: Wake up call! Who are fighting on the front of the above issues? Traditionalist! Who is out there making it worse? The *same* people and the same forces that want to impose gay lifestyles as an equivalent lifestyle, want to create gay marriage, are out there trying to squash abstinence education and moral values in schools and in institutions (eg boy scouts), want to undermine those upholding traditional values.
Meanwhile those making the case day in day out for moral values in everyday lives are attacked as homophobes - case in point is DR LAURA SCHLESINGER. She has done more than any other person in the US to raise awareness and attack *those very problems* you mention. She has attacked wanton divorce, she coached people through making the moral choice, she is out there Is she praised? Nope. She was ignored until some choice comments about sexual deviancy of the gay lifestyle got her pilloried as a 'homophobe'. let's be honest, we all practically are deep down live-n-let-live about this issue, it's how far particular moral and aesthetic sensibilities have to be repressed to accept this activity in the cultural/social realm as a 'norm'. Moynihan called it 'defining deviancy down'. It's not about whether sodomy will occur or not - it's about whether moralists will have the freedom to call it "immoral". You want hypocrisy? Those who attacked Dr Laura for her 'insensitive' remarks claim to want 'tolerance' but they are VERY INTOLERANT of any attitude that opposes them. Sensitivity and tolerance are a one-way street for these folks. Now I ask you: Whose side are you on? The side of those who want to stand up to divorce, illegitimacy, trashy behavior by teenage girls and boys, or those who think all of the above - and sodomy and 'if it feels good it's okay' sexual mores - should be 'accepted' on the same moral plane as fidelity to family values and marriage vows. The fetish with homosexual 'acceptance' is having huge negative consequences for sexual mores in the next generation. the radicals wouldnt have it any other way, for their agenda is far bigger than the 2% of us who are homosexuals.