Criminalisation of homosexual behaviour?

That's completely untrue. In fact, courts have upheld religious Christmas, Hanukkah, and simlar displays, when done in a cultural context. My own cty has a nativity in their central plaza. They also have a Christmas tree, menorah, and santa claus. Over city hall are candles with the words "joy" and "peace on earth" on a banner.

Not necessarily. Laws that violate the US or state constitutions are strtuck down, regardless of whether they were passed by ballot or by bill.

What would you consider homosexual contact? Two men hugging? kissing? holding hands? I've done this with men, and I'm not homosexual.

 

What would you consider homosexual contact? Two men hugging? kissing? holding hands? I've done this with men, and I'm not homosexual. [/QB][/QUOTE]
------------------------------------------------
George Bush has done it Prince Abdullah lots of times, is he Gay?

 

Johnv,

we have many instances where Christmas decorations are NOT allowed because its gov't property. I did not say that this was true in ALL states.

Public displays of gay affection would be what is seen in "gay pride parades."

I think you and me both understand what Im talking about.....so please, don't make me describe it....

 

Don't forget: if they can regulate what homosexuals can and cannot do, what would stop them from regulating what the rest of us do?

Regards,
BiR

 

I believe the leadership of the Supreme Court was Chief Justice William Renquist. As for ad hominem name calling, homeliness (as well as beauty) is in the eye of the beholder. Has no bearing on her rulings. Personal attacks based on one's looks is not very Christian. </font>[/QUOTE]Wow! How are things in left field. The late Chief Justice did not vote to legalize sodomy. Sandra Day O'Connor did. She is a pillar of salt like Mrs. Lot. She looks like sin and she acts like sin and she votes for demonic things. Do you think that same-sex sodomy should be legal? That is merely a call for the spread of STDs and the spread of Aids and the spread of mental illness. Society has a duty to stand against the prostitution of men and women, the molestation of childred, and the practice of bestiality as well as same-sex sex. Justice O'Connor is in the tradition of Mrs. Lot and she does look like sin and probably stinks like it too.

 

Greetings, BiR, whatever airport you are in at the moment in your businesslife.

The reprobates are only 1 or 2 percent of the population so we don't have to take orders from them. Didn't you see that Texas voted 3 to 1 not to legalize same-sex marriage? Majority rules; minority has rights.

Just say no to sloppy agape.

 

It is not true in any state. If a local governing body has decided to refrain from religious decor as a matter of local policy, that's their choice. There is no legislation forbidding it, nor is there legislation requiring it.

I've never been to a gay pride parade. Again, what are you referring to? Guys holding hands? Guys wearing leather pants and no shirt??

TO be honest, I'm curious as to what you'd legislate for a gay person that you would permit publicly for a straight person. I personally think several male/female public displays of affection are offensive, but I wouldn't support legislation banning it.

 

These laws would be enacted for all. It's just the sodomites that would howl the loudest. These laws probably wouldn't effect them in the privacy of their own houses just as we are protected in our homes. It would curb their enthusiasm for public display of their deviency. I hope.

 

Since you favor laws not effect people in the privacy of their own homes, it baffles me that you denounce the invalidation of the Texas sodomy law (which invalidated heteroseual sodomy laws that several states had, though WNDites never mention that).

I freely and bold say that I do not favor laws that make sodomy illegal. I likewise do not favor laws that ban fornication, gluttony, sloth, drunkenness, envy, or covetousness in the privacy of one's own home. I do, however, boldly and without hesitation acknowlege that these are sins, that we, the church, need to encurage people to refrain from, and give them the tools to avoid.

 

The legalization of same-sex sodomy is an abomination because it says that to society and government that some people are throwaways. It is the duty of the government to protect the weak. The legalization of same-sex sodomy only swells the welfare rolls with people with incurable physical diseases and with mental illness that results from such an abomination.

It is the libertarians who think that as long as you don't throw your trash in their yard, everything else you do is okay. I disagree living in an urban neighborhood racked with every vice. In fact, I think it is criminal for the state of Indiana to run a lottery to fleece the weak-minded and the mentally ill.

 

Then you should likewise make fornication, gluttony, sloth, drunkenness, envy, taking the Lord's name, and covetousness illegal. Ya can't be selective about individual liberties.

No thanks, as much as I abhor these things, I'll prefer that the government stay out of our private homes and refrain from enacting such bans. I will continue to rely on scripture, not the law, for my moral compass. Others are welcome to do likewise, or not.

 

I think that any husband caught cheating should be imprisoned for several years, possibly tortured (no major organ failure, but a lot of waterboarding would be good). If a wife is caught cheating, she should be given a good talking-to with mandated marriage counseling.

Opposite-sex sodomy (yuck) should be illegal, but same-sex doesn't concern me, so live & let live on that. Gluttony & sloth should be given a pass but covetousness and taking the Lord's name in vain should be severely sanctioned.

In short, you stink but I smell like sweet basil.

 

ok Johnv,
you are starting to convince me.

 

This is practically a death sentence to men during a Super Bowl party

 

This is practically a death sentence to men during a Super Bowl party </font>[/QUOTE]Oh well, maybe, but, you know, price of freedom and all...**shrugs**

 

We did'nt all vote in favor of this amendment in Texas, some of us have some common sense.

 

So people who don't agree with you are stupid ? Only dummies are against homosexual weddings ?

 

Rocko9,

As FTR stated about sodomy laws in Texas the Police took no action to enforce them. So eventually those laws were done away with.

Perhaps I should clarify: the Texas sodomy law wasn't eventually done away with, it was struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.


bapmom,

Please don't be taken in by Johnv's wiles.

 

Speaking of stupid! If you had read the proposed amendment, you would see that it was not all about weddings, Bro. Curtis.