[jmc813]

Don't bring that up. The Christian Socialists don't like to talk about the pesky facts of heterosexual sodomy.

[MineralMan]

"Don't bring that up. The Christian Socialists don't like to talk about the pesky facts of heterosexual sodomy."

Some do. There's one person here who claims that all oral sexual activity is sinful and against his deity's will. I can't seem to find any support for that point of view in the Bible, but that doesn't stop them.

Still, there are a lot of good ol' boys down in the Bible belt who are committing these heinous felonies with their own wives. Now, if they knew that they could lose their right to own firearms if tried and convicted of sodomy, maybe some of those laws would get repealed.

I guess it all depends on whose ox is being gored, eh?

[jwalsh07]

The Christian Socialists don't like to talk about the pesky facts of heterosexual sodomy

The decision wasn't based in "equal protection", it was based in policy and the right to privacy found in the Roe and Doe penumbra.

Overall, a good day for judicial activism and proponents of a strong central government.

A bad day for federalists and freedom.

[Clint N. Suhks]

The Christian Socialists don't like to talk about the pesky facts of heterosexual sodomy.

That’s because it’s different. Sex is not sodomy, sex is the possibility of procreation and all though sodomy between heterosexuals may not be procreation, sexual acts what ever they may be between heterosexuals can and does lead to procreation. For the same reasons we codify marriage as compelling state’s interest to preserve the traditional family unit, there is no reason to regulate such behavior for heterosexuals.

If you are going extend heterosexual rights to other forms of behavior then it open the doors to more than homosexuality, bestiality (personal property), consensual pedophilia and consensual incest have no better standing than homosexual acts and are equally justifiable.