[spunkets]

" society would not tolerate anti-social behavior because it would overwhelm the charitable structure of society and thus burden charitable organziations with costs from perfectly preventable ailments, like the ones arising from homosexual sodomy."

It puts the choice back where it belongs, to the individual that decides where his labors and treasures go. He may have the physical treasure, but he's not going to squander it on some things. He also maintains his right to say what he thinks. A right the SCOTUS jeopardized today, by saying the law demeans their behavior.

[HumanaeVitae]

And if homosexuals are going to blithely claim the 'right' that I have to accept them, then I can blithely claim the 'right' not to live in the same society as they do. I can claim a 'right' to free association and thus the right not to be affected by their behavior. The 'rights' thing works both ways, chief. It's a losing argument.