To: jmc813
The Christian Socialists don't like to talk about the pesky facts of heterosexual sodomy. Thats because its 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 states 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.
To: Clint N. Suhks
In addition, the marriage bed is holy. And only men and women can be married. Of course, SCOTUS will throw out that limitation, too, in about 5-10 years.
To: Clint N. Suhks
"Thats because its different. Sex is not sodomy"
Read the laws, dude. Sodomy is a matter of legal definition, and several states make no distinction between oral sex between a husband and wife and a couple of guys (or ladies for that matter.)
We're talking legal issues here, not dictionaries.
To: Clint N. Suhks
Sex is not sodomy, sex is the possibility of procreation.... For someone who hates Clinton, that's a pretty twisted definition of "sex"
1,271 posted on
06/26/2003 2:48:05 PM PDT by
gdani
To: Clint N. Suhks
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.What about masturbation? Forgive me if I'm playing devil's advocate a bit, I'm doing so to get a better understanding of where people's opinions come from.
1,282 posted on
06/26/2003 2:57:14 PM PDT by
jmc813
(If you're interested in joining a FR list to discuss Big Brother 4 on CBS, please FReepmail me)
To: Clint N. Suhks
For the same reasons we codify marriage as compelling states interest to preserve the traditional family unit, there is no reason to regulate such behavior for heterosexuals. What you wrote seems to go against American traditions and American common law.
Heterosexual sodomy was illegal until 1960 in all states, and only recently have state courts and state legislature begun to desmantle anti-sodomy laws applying to heterosexuals.
What was the compelling state interest to regulate heterosexual sodomy until 1960?
To: Clint N. Suhks
consensual pedophilia No matter what phoney arguments you make, there is no such thing as "consensual pedophilia."
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson