Posted on 02/18/2003 11:41:51 AM PST by Remedy
Oh good grief! Sleep around with 1,100 people and call yourself a "victim"? These people are victims of their own ignorance and/or stupidity. It's not like an AIDS virus smashed through their doors and infected them.
>>
I'm just curious, how do lesbains come in "12 times more likely to have had an oral infection from penile contact"?<<
Family Research Report - May-Jun 2002 Omnisexual -Webster's dictionary4 defines 'homosexual' by "sexual attraction toward [or relations with] a person of the same sex" (p. 464). Yet as both the FRI and the Kinsey studies demonstrate, sexual flexibility rather than a fixed interest in or exclusive performance with members of the same sex is characteristic of 'homosexuals.' Almost all 'homosexuals,' in fact, manage to have sex with the opposite sex.
The term [homosexual]certainly does not seem to fit ex-homosexuals, many of whom express no further interest in sex with their sex. Further, the sexual flexibility that the great majority of 'homosexuals' exhibit over their lifetimes does not fit the 'compulsive' nuances associated with the term 'homosexual' either.
Family Research Council: The Negative Health Effects of ...
Lesbians are at Risk through Sex with MSM
It may not be a natural right ...Correction: It is not a natural right.
So yes, at least in the U.S., it's a right.
Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 US 186 (1986) The Constitution does not confer a fundamental right upon homosexuals to engage in sodomy. None of the fundamental rights announced in this Court's prior cases involving family relationships, marriage, or procreation bear any resemblance to the right asserted in this case. And any claim that those cases stand for the proposition that any kind of private sexual conduct between consenting adults is constitutionally insulated from state proscription is unsupportable.
BURGER, C.J., Concurring Opinion Decisions of individuals relating to homosexual conduct have been subject to state intervention throughout the history of Western civilization. Condemnation of those practices is firmly rooted in Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards. Homosexual sodomy was a capital crime under Roman law
. During the English Reformation, when powers of the ecclesiastical courts were transferred to the King's Courts, the first English statute criminalizing sodomy was passed
. Blackstone described "the infamous crime against nature" as an offense of "deeper malignity" than rape, a heinous act "the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature," and "a crime not fit to be named." W. Blackstone, Commentaries . The common law of England, including its prohibition of sodomy, became the received law of Georgia and the other Colonies. In 1816, the Georgia Legislature passed the statute at issue here, and that statute has been continuously in force in one form or another since that time. To hold that the act of homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right would be to cast aside millennia of moral teaching.
With respect to the founding of our nation and the moral support for our form of Government, the real issue is whether it is an unalienable right. The problem is we are attempting to define unalienable rights without establishing the basis for those rights.
Jefferson ascribed the basis of those rights to be "nature and nature's God." The exact concept Jefferson had of G-d is not what one would call "Christian" but he did seem to believe that there was a moral order of the universe aking to the physical order of the universe. Therefore there was a moral authority in appealing to that moral order sufficient to assert our right to declare Independence from Great Britain and form our own government.
There's a lot of room for discussion in this, including whether our government is at all moral given that it has strayed far from Jefferson's purpose of "protecting those rights." But the root point for discussion is, what is the basis of unalienable rights. If we don't answer that, then our children will be reading an article about how a judge ruled quoting Leviticus 18:23 is hate speech.
Shalom.
>>>
There's a lot of room for discussion in this, including whether our government is at all moral given that it has strayed far from Jefferson's purpose of "protecting those rights." But the root point for discussion is, what is the basis of unalienable rights.<<<Thomas Jefferson on Sodomy Sect. XIV. Whosoever shall be guilty of rape, polygamy, or sodomy* with a man or woman, shall be punished; if a man, by castration, a woman, by boring through the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch in diameter at the least. Peterson, Merrill D. "Crimes and Punishments" Thomas Jefferson: Writings Public Papers (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc. 1984) pp. 355, 356.
Is Same-Sex Marriage Good for the Nation?
WallBuilders | Resources | The Founding Fathers and Deism The reader, as do many others, claimed that Jefferson omitted all miraculous events of Jesus from his "Bible." Rarely do those who make this claim let Jefferson speak for himself. Jefferson own words explain that his intent for that book was not for it to be a "Bible," but rather for it to be a primer for the Indians on the teachings of Christ (which is why Jefferson titled that work, "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth"). What Jefferson did was to take the "red letter" portions of the New Testament and publish these teachings in order to introduce the Indians to Christian morality. And as President of the United States, Jefferson signed a treaty with the Kaskaskia tribe wherein he provided-at the government's expense-Christian missionaries to the Indians. In fact, Jefferson himself declared, "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." While many might question this claim, the fact remains that Jefferson called himself a Christian, not a deist.
The reason that such critics never mention any other Founders is evident. For example, consider what must be explained away if the following signers of the Constitution were to be mentioned: Charles Pinckney and John Langdon-founders of the American Bible Society; James McHenry-founder of the Baltimore Bible Society; Rufus King-helped found a Bible society for Anglicans; Abraham Baldwin-a chaplain in the Revolution and considered the youngest theologian in America; Roger Sherman, William Samuel Johnson, John Dickinson, and Jacob Broom-also theological writers; James Wilson and William Patterson-placed on the Supreme Court by President George Washington, they had prayer over juries in the U. S. Supreme Court room; and the list could go on. And this does not even include the huge number of thoroughly evangelical Christians who signed the Declaration or who helped frame the Bill of Rights.
>>
So, yes, sodomy is generally understood to be a "right" in the U.S.<<The penalties for violating sodomy laws in the USA:
Idaho, 5 years to life
Oklahoma, 20 years
Michigan, 15 years
Mississippi, 10 years
Puerto Rico, 8 - 20 years
Louisiana, 5 years/$2000
South Carolina, 5 years/$500
North Carolina, 3 years
Virginia, 1-5 years
Alabama, 1 year/$2000
Missouri, 1 year/$1000
Kansas, 6 months/$1000
Utah, 6 months/$299
Florida, 60 days/$500
Texas, $500
Homosexuals Demand Legalization of Sex With Strangers in Public Parks
Lawrence v. Texas, 41 SW.3d 349 (2001)
Hundreds rally for '10 Commandments judge' Moore wrote a separate concurring opinion, repudiating homosexuality on religious grounds, calling it "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature and of nature's God."
>>
there were no Biblical quotes on that ad. <<Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
SEE POST #4 >>
The Court of Queen's Bench in Saskatchewan upheld a 2001
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.