From homosexuality to incest?

TownHall.com ^ | Thursday, April 24, 2003 | by Marvin Olasky

[longtermmemmory]

Actually it does not. In order to get into the home you have fourth ammendment rights. Some laws are just unenforceable and have been struck down as unenforceable. In this situation, you would have to show the conduct is traveling outside the "bedroom". In the texas case there was a complaint. The officer just had unfortunate timing.

So by you argument its ok to specifically prohibit homosexual conduct in public restrooms or public places? Its not a private area...

[=Intervention=]

The practice of homosexuality is not the same thing as being a woman or black. I'm really curious. How much do you really know about the homosexual lifestyle? To defend a choice in the abstract and then say the choice is the same thing as being born a color or a race is quite untrue. Even if you argue that homosexuals are born that way, there is plenty of evidence that they can and DO change.

[longtermmemmory]

They do and they are not recognized under the law. Please save your governemtn out of the marriage business for some other thread.

[Qwerty]

Yes, sex in public is inappropriate and should be illegal.

[=Intervention=]

Stop spreading lies about the Bible. I believe this is the second time I've called you on this, Non Seq.

[=Intervention=]

Exactly. You "believe" you were born that way -- you have no evidence. Case closed.

[longtermmemmory]

So a law which specifically says HOMOSEXUAL SEX in public is illegal is constitutionally sound.

[=Intervention=]

I favor it. Part of keeping society together is punishment meted out to deviance. There should be laws against adultery. More of them, in fact.

[Qwerty]

"The practice of homosexuality is not the same thing as being a woman or black."

Disagree. I'm not black but I'm a white lesbian.

"I'm really curious. How much do you really know about the homosexual lifestyle?"

A lot. It's pretty average.

"To defend a choice in the abstract and then say the choice is the same thing as being born a color or a race is quite untrue."

Says you.

"Even if you argue that homosexuals are born that way, there is plenty of evidence that they can and DO change."

Yes. Evidence put forth by reparative therapists (they make their money doing it) and religious organizations (they truly want to believe gays can change through Jesus). Even so, their "success" rate is minimal, and there have been plenty of scandals where the reformed poster boy goes off and gets caught at a gay bar, or with another man...

Same old story, every day...

[longtermmemmory]

no behavior has ever been shown to be immutable.

[Qwerty]

"Exactly. You "believe" you were born that way -- you have no evidence. Case closed."

Exactly. You "believe" I was not born this way. You have no evidence. Case closed.

You'll have to do better than that.

[=Intervention=]

What else is sodomy, if not sex between two people of the same sex? Duhhhh.

[Qwerty]

"So a law which specifically says HOMOSEXUAL SEX in public is illegal is constitutionally sound."

Of course.. that's within the public domain and applies to everyone.

[Qwerty]

"I favor it. Part of keeping society together is punishment meted out to deviance. There should be laws against adultery. More of them, in fact."

Well at least you're consistent... but you're not convincing.

[Qwerty]

"What else is sodomy, if not sex between two people of the same sex? Duhhhh."

You're wrong. Consult a dictionary. I'll even help you... this is from Merriam Webster:

1 : copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal 2 : noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex

[=Intervention=]

Of COURSE it's legal. Animals do not think (after all, who's saving whom, here?). When was the last time you saw a chimpanzee run for office, or complain about his or her rights under the law? Never? Well there you go. Humans care for animals and go so far as to draft laws considering them, but the reverse has never occured. That says much about the status of animals and why they do not deserve rights under any conception of natural law.

[matthew_the_brain]

Homosexuality and Homosexual acts are deviant behavior, by definition. That is a simple fact that some people seem to forget. to compare homosexuality and the act to beastiality, incest, necrophilia, ephebophila, etc, etc is a valid comparison based entirely on their common deviant characteristics.

Part of the problem with the homosexual mindset is this constant identification of their self image, and to a greater extent their self esteem to their deviant sexual appetite.

Just because society in 2003 has a special catagory for homosexuals, and not ephebophiliacs or necrophiliacs, does not make it less deviant.

[biblewonk]

This all boils down to whether or not the State has a right to regulate sexual conduct. Basically it does, in my opinion.

Surely there is no other individual thing that occupies more of mans time than sex. The spectrum of "sexual conduct" is vast and includes everything from a mildly erotic thought to Nazism, from Missionary position in a Christian marriage to the most horrendous of child beastial rape canibilism. "Sexual conduct" and laws and the powers of government can never be summed up and placed on a bumper sticker.

[=Intervention=]

You have no sense of history. Go back and read what sort of mores were expressed in law up 'til 1950 and you'll see that this is nothing new, nor nothing deviant.

[Qwerty]

"Of COURSE it's legal. Animals do not think (after all, who's saving whom, here?). When was the last time you saw a chimpanzee run for office, or complain about his or her rights under the law?"

Are you responding about my post on whether it's legal to light my dog on fire? It's fully illegal.