Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 5

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I'm curious where you're going with this [your attack on Hebrews 13:4]

I've been curious where you were going with this, on one paw you are advocating the return of the government to the privacy of the bedroom and on the other putting forward reasons why the government should not be in the bedroom. I'm more than willing to concede the latter if you wish.

Government has a compelling interest to support the nucleus of society: the traditional family (one man, one woman, united in matrimony and the children that come from that union afterwards).

When government becomes sexual anarchists and allows anything to go on as long as it's done in private (incest, bestiality, homosexuality, etc. etc. etc.) it's not only harmful to the individuals engaging in those behaviors (where do you think HIV/AIDS and all the STD's disproportionately contracted by homosexuals happen at? Granted, public restroom toilet stalls and public park bushes have to be included with the sodomy chambers as crime scenes...) it's harmful to society.

As we've seen after homosexuality was made legal in the vast majority of States and finalized with the unconstitutional ruling of Lawrence v Texas:

When immoral behaviors are made legal, those who engage in them organize.


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
now give some examples of laws that weren't Judeo-Christian based that came from "pre-Christian British Common Law, Roman Law, and several other legal traditions".

I would say the first amendment for one,

Hear the Founding Fathers on Christianity, Faith, Jesus, and the Bible
https://www.thoughtco.com/christian-quotes-of-the-founding-fathers-700789

Why do you think the Founding Fathers left England? For religious freedom (they didn't want to be forced to worship under the Church of England).

the establishment clause and freedom of religion conflicts with the ten commandments.

"Congress shall make no law..."

The basis of the establishment clause goes back to my earlier point: Freedom to worship.

Trail by jury,

Criminal trials have a Judeo basis: Deuteronomy 19:15. How do you think that 12 people sitting on a jury came about?

In the ancient Hebrew text, the 12 minor prophets were one book called “The Twelve”) 1- Hosea, 2- Joel, 3- Amos, 4- Obadiah, 5- Jonah, 6- Micah, 7- Nahum, 8- Habakkuk, 9- Zephaniah, 10- Haggai, 11- Zechariah, and 12- Malachi. The 12 Apostles (Matthew 10:2-4, Luke 6:13-16). The 12 Discovers (Numbers 13:1-33). The 12 Stones (Revelation 21:14)].

jury nullification,

I.e. giving a Judge the right to overrule a jury on it's findings. Which also goes back to the Biblical origins of our criminal justice system:
Deuteronomy 16:18,

and other various aspects of the common law tradition that allow courts and judges to not only interpret the law but judge the law itself and overturn it if necessary.

Now that you've been schooled on the biblical basis of America's criminal justice system...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Here's a thought Kit: How about we get society to do an experiment and outlaw homosexuality for 14 years and see if HIV/AIDS and other STD's that those who engage in homosexuality disproportionately contract dramatically drops?

We already did that and the AIDS pandemic grew from an unknown threat to its peak during that timeframe, all prior to Lawrence.

Nice try: Laws against sodomy (i.e. primarily enforced against acts of homosexuality) were on the books in every US State (in many States it was a felony) during homosexual pedophile Alfred Kinsey's fraudulent work and homosexual pedophile Frank Kameny harassing the APA to removing homosexuality from its' list of mental disorders, both directly effecting (overturning) US laws on homosexuality. The diseases that run rampant amongst those who engage in homosexuality didn't run rampant when they had to hide behind closed doors to engage in their unnatural and extremely disease ridden and deadly behavior.

Care to review CDC charts again?

I didn't think so.


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Please learn to link your information Kit. Regarding the Treaty of Tripoli and the letter that was written to your barbarian Muslim allies:

Yet, it was written by Washington and Adams, read aloud on the Senate floor before the vote, debated before the vote and passed unanimously by the Senate. Yes, there have been court justices and other figures throughout history that have expressed differing opinions but none have overturned the establishment clause yet.

Since you didn't understand it the first time I posted it: Unlike your theocratic Muslim allies, a Christian nation doesn't mean a state religion (you can't force Christianity on anyone), but it does mean that nation embraced Judeo-Christian laws and Christian mores', which the US during the time of the Treaty of Tripoli did.


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Surely you're not upset that I on occasion point out that the leaders of the homosexual movement were/are practicing pedophiles and pederasts or promoted pedophilia and pederasty are you Kit? If I thought for a second that you were upset, I don't think that I could go on talking about one of the core values of the homosexual movement: the indoctrination and sexual molestation of children.

No, I've commented on your namedropping of people and what I think of it before. Even if your claim were true, and too many of your links turn out to be guilt by really loose association, it only tells me about one person not ALL homosexuals

I must have missed where you refuted the evidence that I provided.

You know what this thread needs Kit? A proud and unrepentant homosexual to come forward and tell me and the followers of this thread that he is a good wholesome homosexual who has never molested a child.

Do you know anyone that could come forward and state that Kit? Of course I would have a few questions that I would ask him...


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Here's an idea: Since child molestation is such a huge part of the homosexual movement, what are your thoughts on this symbol being attached to the rainbow flag?

[NAMBLA is a joke for anybody who isn't an anti-gay activist.

The 'pioneers' of the modern day LGBTQ movement (Harry Hay, Frank Kameny, etc.) didn't think so, as they either belonged to NAMBLA or spoke at their meetings. Did you know that child molester Frank Kameny actually met with the President of the United States?

Note Bawney Fwank in the background. The homosexual prostitution ring that he and his young lover ran out of Fwank's apt is a story for another time (it was discussed in an earlier thread).

The best I figure when reading about the organization its real membership nowadays is a handful of people who are barely managing to run a website. They have had no real success at their stated goals to lower the age of consent, the age of consent laws in the US have only gone up.

NAMBLA has diversified Kit: They've become priests and bishops and have access to 12 year old altar boys. They've become Scout Masters in the new "Boy Sodomizers of America" and are being allowed to go on overnight campouts with young boys. They're involved in politics where they pass laws prohibiting children with homosexual desires to seek therapy to overcome those desires. It took lots of hard work to get where they are today Kit, but there obviously were some promises made when they were booted from 'gay' pride parades for the bad publicity that they brought their fellow child molesters of the LGBTQ movement.

Sadly, the group is such a boogeyman for anti-gay groups that realistic research on the organization is not really possible for all the noise trying to pretend it is still a thing. That is not to say that there are not pedophiles and pedophile groups out there, just that you won't find them in NAMBLA.

Speaking of pedophile groups: I'll be talking more about pedophilia when I discuss the APA's recent comments on it.

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I don't recall any State Civil Rights Commissions punishing Christians for other things outside of refusing to kowtow to homosexuality. Perhaps you can give some examples?

Since Obergefell searches are dominated with same-sex wedding cases, so it might take a while to run down specific examples but there were cases of pharmacists refusing to issue birth control medications even to the point of destroying the prescription.

I stand corrected: the LGBTQ movement's abortion allies have done pretty much the same, i.e. forced their immoral lifestyle on people of faith.

Hence the culture wars.

 

[MrDante]

Regarding Judith Reisman and her extensive research that has exposed homosexual pedophile/junk researcher Alfred Kinsey:

I did an entire chapter in Part 1 (numerous videos and articles) on homosexual pedophile Alfred Kinsey, who is the modern day father of the sexual anarchy movement. Funny, I don't recall you or your LGBTQ allies engaging me in debate back then.

I guess it's time to do a review (and a thorough one at that) of homosexual pedophile Alfred Kinsey and amongst other things, how he and his homosexual associates RAPED children not even a year old to come to conclusion that 'children are born sexual'.

Let's take a look at the evidence for these claims.

















seems the only "evidence" for Reisman's claims is her own claims. And while she is a far more credible source than you she has nothing but her own delusions.

 

[MrDante]

When government becomes sexual anarchists and allows anything to go on as long as it's done in private (incest, bestiality, homosexuality, etc. etc. etc.) it's not only harmful to the individuals engaging in those behaviors (where do you think HIV/AIDS and all the STD's disproportionately contracted by homosexuals happen at? Granted, public restroom toilet stalls and public park bushes have to be included with the sodomy chambers as crime scenes...) it's harmful to society.

hmmm... black people are disproportionately affected by HIV and all the STD's... They must also get them is the same way and same locations. SO you must be saying that African American's are harmful to society right?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Regarding Judith Reisman and her extensive research that has exposed homosexual pedophile/junk researcher Alfred Kinsey:

I did an entire chapter in Part 1 (numerous videos and articles) on homosexual pedophile Alfred Kinsey, who is the modern day father of the sexual anarchy movement. Funny, I don't recall you or your LGBTQ allies engaging me in debate back then.

I guess it's time to do a review (and a thorough one at that) of homosexual pedophile Alfred Kinsey and amongst other things, how he and his homosexual associates RAPED children not even a year old to come to conclusion that 'children are born sexual'.

Let's take a look at the evidence for these claims.

seems the only "evidence" for Reisman's claims is her own claims. And while she is a far more credible source than you she has nothing but her own delusions.

Charts published by homosexual pedophile Alfred Kinsey and statements made by Kinsey's associate Paul Gebhard will be some of the evidence that will be used.

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

When government becomes sexual anarchists and allows anything to go on as long as it's done in private (incest, bestiality, homosexuality, etc. etc. etc.) it's not only harmful to the individuals engaging in those behaviors (where do you think HIV/AIDS and all the STD's disproportionately contracted by homosexuals happen at? Granted, public restroom toilet stalls and public park bushes have to be included with the sodomy chambers as crime scenes...) it's harmful to society.

hmmm... black people are disproportionately affected by HIV and all the STD's... They must also get them is the same way and same locations. SO you must be saying that African American's are harmful to society right?

Black males who engage in homosexuality and some black heterosexual women who were unfortunate enough to have had sex with black males who were on the "down low" at the time.

 

[ok doser]

hmmm... black people are disproportionately affected by HIV and all the STD's... They must also get them is the same way and same locations. SO you must be saying that African American's are harmful to society right?

black ghetto culture is harmful to society, yes

as it happens, it's especially harmful to that portion of society that is black and lives in the ghetto

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by MrDante
hmmm... black people are disproportionately affected by HIV and all the STD's... They must also get them is the same way and same locations. SO you must be saying that African American's are harmful to society right?

black ghetto culture is harmful to society, yes

as it happens, it's especially harmful to that portion of society that is black and lives in the ghetto

Black homosexuals are engaging in homosexuality, which is inherently a disease ridden behavior. Just because they don't use precautions in an attempt to prevent STD's and HIV/AIDS doesn't say anything against black homosexuals, but it does say a lot about the behavior, because if homosexuality weren't a disease ridden behavior, precautions wouldn't be needed.

But then you Libertarians don't care about that do you, as long as you don't have to see it.

 

[ok doser]

... you Libertarians...

you're an idiot

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
But then you Libertarians don't care about that do you, as long as you don't have to see it.

you're an idiot

Quote: Originally posted by ok doser
ironically, most people don't care what people do in their bedrooms

if homos were willing to keep their disgusting perversions in their bedrooms, nobody would care...
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...utlaw-sodomy&p=4634285&viewfull=1#post4634285

In case anyone thought that we're on the same side, we're not.

 

[ok doser]

acw idiotically refers to me as a libertarian:

... you Libertarians...

i point out that he's an idiot:

you're an idiot

acw, being an idiot, thinks i want a demonstration of his idiocy:

Quote: Originally posted by ok doser
ironically, most people don't care what people do in their bedrooms

if homos were willing to keep their disgusting perversions in their bedrooms, nobody would care...
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...utlaw-sodomy&p=4634285&viewfull=1#post4634285

In case anyone thought that we're on the same side, we're not.

yep you're an idiot :thumb:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

acw idiotically refers to me as a libertarian:

i point out that he's an idiot:


acw, being an idiot, thinks i want a demonstration of his idiocy:



yep you're an idiot :thumb:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=ULGaOaln6Ao

 

[Kit the Coyote]

Government has a compelling interest to support the nucleus of society: the traditional family (one man, one woman, united in matrimony and the children that come from that union afterwards).

When government becomes sexual anarchists and allows anything to go on as long as it's done in private (incest, bestiality, homosexuality, etc. etc. etc.) it's not only harmful to the individuals engaging in those behaviors (where do you think HIV/AIDS and all the STD's disproportionately contracted by homosexuals happen at? Granted, public restroom toilet stalls and public park bushes have to be included with the sodomy chambers as crime scenes...) it's harmful to society.

So again your answer is yes. And I agree with much of that compelling interest as long as it is applied equally. Which means traditional and same-sex families equally.

As we've seen after homosexuality was made legal in the vast majority of States and finalized with the unconstitutional ruling of Lawrence v Texas:

When immoral behaviors are made legal, those who engage in them organize.

It is called the right of association, it is in the Constitution, any group has a right to organize to petition the government and society legal or not.

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Hear the Founding Fathers on Christianity, Faith, Jesus, and the Bible
https://www.thoughtco.com/christian-quotes-of-the-founding-fathers-700789

Why do you think the Founding Fathers left England? For religious freedom (they didn't want to be forced to worship under the Church of England).

And yet not single mention of it in the foundational document of the nation, except for requirements that restrict its influence in government.

"Congress shall make no law..."

The basis of the establishment clause goes back to my earlier point: Freedom to worship.

That is HALF of it.

Criminal trials have a Judeo basis: Deuteronomy 19:15. How do you think that 12 people sitting on a jury came about?

In the ancient Hebrew text, the 12 minor prophets were one book called “The Twelve”) 1- Hosea, 2- Joel, 3- Amos, 4- Obadiah, 5- Jonah, 6- Micah, 7- Nahum, 8- Habakkuk, 9- Zephaniah, 10- Haggai, 11- Zechariah, and 12- Malachi. The 12 Apostles (Matthew 10:2-4, Luke 6:13-16). The 12 Discovers (Numbers 13:1-33). The 12 Stones (Revelation 21:14)].

I.e. giving a Judge the right to overrule a jury on its findings. Which also goes back to the Biblical origins of our criminal justice system:
Deuteronomy 16:18,

And where does it say that a judge and jury has the authority to declare a section of Leviticus invalid?

 

[Kit the Coyote]

Nice try: Laws against sodomy (i.e. primarily enforced against acts of homosexuality) were on the books in every US State (in many States it was a felony) during homosexual pedophile Alfred Kinsey's fraudulent work and homosexual pedophile Frank Kameny harassing the APA to removing homosexuality from its' list of mental disorders, both directly effecting (overturning) US laws on homosexuality. The diseases that run rampant amongst those who engage in homosexuality didn't run rampant when they had to hide behind closed doors to engage in their unnatural and extremely disease-ridden and deadly behavior.

Care to review CDC charts again?

Yet none of that including your precious CDC charts addressed my point, that the pandemic developed and reached its peak BEFORE it was legal. Your solution has already been tried and failed.

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Since you didn't understand it the first time I posted it: Unlike your theocratic Muslim allies, a Christian nation doesn't mean a state religion (you can't force Christianity on anyone), but it does mean that nation embraced Judeo-Christian laws and Christian mores', which the US during the time of the Treaty of Tripoli did.

Oh, I see yes the US is a Christian nation if you are going by the definition that the largest religion in the country is Christianity. Doesn't change the fact that it is a secular government.

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
You know what this thread needs Kit? A proud and unrepentant homosexual to come forward and tell me and the followers of this thread that he is a good wholesome homosexual who has never molested a child.

Do you know anyone that could come forward and state that Kit? Of course I would have a few questions that I would ask him...

I know several including my own son but they don't have the interest in political message boards I have or being trolled by you.

I stand corrected: the LGBTQ movement's abortion allies have done pretty much the same, i.e. forced their immoral lifestyle on people of faith.

Hence the culture wars.

I always found it amusing that folks who claim they want to stop abortions by denying people the contraceptives they use to prevent the need for such abortions.

 

[Ktoyou]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
With Donald Trump to this day being proud that he was on the cover of the SMUT magazine Playboy and interviewed for an article in that same edition, it's time again to talk about the SMUT peddler Hugh Hefner and how he admired the pedophile Alfred Kinsey.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=230&v=stufhfZGCAw



I see that you're posting something from page 24? I guess being late to the party is better than not showing up at all.

First let me thank you for posting the video by Dr. Judith Reisman showing how we got to this stage of sexual degeneracy in our nation.

If you can provide information showing that homosexual pedophile Alfred Kinsey didn't have ties to pedophile/former WWII Nazi officer Dr. Fritz von Balluseck, or can refute anything stated in the video (other than the IU/ISU mistake) please do.

Your premise is based on a lie.
You are just not worth debating with, you're too ignorant.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Regarding homosexual pedophile/child rapist Alfred Kinsey and how his fraudulent studies influenced today's laws and culture:

Your premise is based on a lie.
You are just not worth debating with, you're too ignorant.

What happened to ...Dante? First I'm chatting with you and then he steps in and now you're back.

In any event, just so that you don't go away mad: Judith Reisman, prior to exposing homosexual pedophile/child rapist Alfred Kinsey, was quite an accomplished children's songwriter and singer.

Children need to be allowed to enjoy the innocence of childhood. God bless Dr. Judith Reisman for her work in attempting to allow children to have that innocence once again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpRcGRfCgAk

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Government has a compelling interest to support the nucleus of society: the traditional family (one man, one woman, united in matrimony and the children that come from that union afterwards).

When government becomes sexual anarchists and allows anything to go on as long as it's done in private (incest, bestiality, homosexuality, etc. etc. etc.) it's not only harmful to the individuals engaging in those behaviors (where do you think HIV/AIDS and all the STD's disproportionately contracted by homosexuals happen at? Granted, public restroom toilet stalls and public park bushes have to be included with the sodomy chambers as crime scenes...) it's harmful to society.

So again your answer is yes. And I agree with much of that compelling interest as long as it is applied equally. Which means traditional and same-sex families equally.

If you're a true sexual anarchist, equal protection under the law would endorse polygamy, incestuous relationships/marriage, bestiality and other immoral acts/morally depraved acts.

Wait, you're surely not going to say that the sexually depraved act that you defend is better than those?

(Please use the slippery slope argument next, please).


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
As we've seen after homosexuality was made legal in the vast majority of States and finalized with the unconstitutional ruling of Lawrence v Texas:

When immoral behaviors are made legal, those who engage in them organize.

It is called the right of association, it is in the Constitution, any group has a right to organize to petition the government and society legal or not.

Need we review (again) how the writers of that Constitution felt about homosexuality? They were so disgusted by it that they didn't even discuss it in public.


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Hear the Founding Fathers on Christianity, Faith, Jesus, and the Bible
https://www.thoughtco.com/christian-...fathers-700789

Why do you think the Founding Fathers left England? For religious freedom (they didn't want to be forced to worship under the Church of England).

And yet not single mention of it in the foundational document of the nation, except for requirements that restrict its influence in government.

It was written in other documents, it wasn't needed in the Constitution. BTW, if you still want to discuss the Founding Fathers, let's do it in this thread.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ad-of-All-Founding-Fathers-Threads&highlight=

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
I.e. giving a Judge the right to overrule a jury on its findings. Which also goes back to the Biblical origins of our criminal justice system:
Deuteronomy 16:18,

And where does it say that a judge and jury has the authority to declare a section of Leviticus invalid?

I'm not sure where you're going with this, but criminal laws against homosexuality, bestiality and incest are based on Leviticus 18. Jesus rescinded the penalty phase in the New Testament, so there is not a requirement that homosexuals be executed solely on the act of homosexuality.

In any event, let's move this discussion to the above thread.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Nice try: Laws against sodomy (i.e. primarily enforced against acts of homosexuality) were on the books in every US State (in many States it was a felony) during homosexual pedophile Alfred Kinsey's fraudulent work and homosexual pedophile Frank Kameny harassing the APA to removing homosexuality from its' list of mental disorders, both directly effecting (overturning) US laws on homosexuality. The diseases that run rampant amongst those who engage in homosexuality didn't run rampant when they had to hide behind closed doors to engage in their unnatural and extremely disease-ridden and deadly behavior.

Care to review CDC charts again?

Yet none of that including your precious CDC charts addressed my point, that the pandemic developed and reached its peak BEFORE it was legal. Your solution has already been tried and failed.

Homosexuality was legal or laws against homosexuality weren't enforced in the vast majority of states during the so-called HIV/AIDS pandemic. Also remember that the 'sexual revolution' hit the US in the 1960's and was still going strong in the 80's, so homosexuality was pretty much accepted culturally in our country that was accepting the lies of the fraudulent research of homosexual pedophile/child rapist Alfred Kinsey and his morally depraved degenerate pupil Hugh Hefner.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_laws2.htm

Buggery is just as prevalent today as it was back then. The only difference now is that thanks to the millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars to study HIV/AIDS, those living with it can now manage it better than before.


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Since you didn't understand it the first time I posted it: Unlike your theocratic Muslim allies, a Christian nation doesn't mean a state religion (you can't force Christianity on anyone), but it does mean that nation embraced Judeo-Christian laws and Christian mores', which the US during the time of the Treaty of Tripoli did.

Oh, I see yes the US is a Christian nation if you are going by the definition that the largest religion in the country is Christianity. Doesn't change the fact that it is a secular government.

A secular government that enforced Judeo-Christian based laws?

Let's move any discussion on the Founding Fathers to this thread.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ad-of-All-Founding-Fathers-Threads&highlight=


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
You know what this thread needs Kit? A proud and unrepentant homosexual to come forward and tell me and the followers of this thread that he is a good wholesome homosexual who has never molested a child.

Do you know anyone that could come forward and state that Kit? Of course I would have a few questions that I would ask him...

I know several including my own son but they don't have the interest in political message boards I have or being trolled by you.

One would think as much as I expose pedophilia and pederasty amongst the LGBTQ movement, that a proud and unrepentant member of that movement would want to rush forward and set the record straight.

Oh well, I guess the evidence still stands unopposed.


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I stand corrected: the LGBTQ movement's abortion allies have done pretty much the same, i.e. forced their immoral lifestyle on people of faith.

Hence the culture wars.

I always found it amusing that folks who claim they want to stop abortions by denying people the contraceptives they use to prevent the need for such abortions.

When you say "contraceptives" you're talking about abortion pills like Mifepristone (RU-486) and Misoprostol (or Cytotec) aren't you?

 

[Kit the Coyote]

If you're a true sexual anarchist, equal protection under the law would endorse polygamy, incestuous relationships/marriage, bestiality and other immoral acts/morally depraved acts.

Wait, you're surely not going to say that the sexually depraved act that you defend is better than those?

First off same-sex marriage was and is on a different footing as far as equal treatment under the law because it was subjected to an inequality. That is there were equally situated relationships that were being allowed to marry under the law while being denied to same-sex couples. The other potential marriages you bring up do not have that same inequality, they are denied to all citizens equally.

Given the functions (multiple) that marriage serves in society, all these others do have problems with them that make them less desirable than a monogamous adult marriage.

Poly-marriage has stability issues that are more likely in that multi-polar relationship than in bi-polar relationships. There is also the tendency toward unequal treatment of one of the genders. This happens in traditional marriages too but it is a more obvious problem in poly marriages. Now if a family can make it work, I would say more power to them and they certainly have the Bible on their side if they want to make the case and can convince society. But the issues above and the complication of inheritance issues instead of simplifying them works against several of the primary reasons for marriage.

Incest-marriage has similar problems particularly if it is generational. We have learned enough about the genetics that the issue of genetic problems are not as accurate as we once thought as long as you limit it to one generation. However, creating a new family inside an already existing family can create similar problems of inheritance, equality in the relationship, etc. I don't think there is enough desire for this type of marriage to even have a real advocacy but like poly-marriage, they can appeal to society to change the laws if they can make a good enough case.

Beastiality suffers from the same primary issue as child marriage, if all parties involved are not consenting human adults then it is not marriage but rape even if you want to argue a willing subject.

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Need we review (again) how the writers of that Constitution felt about homosexuality? They were so disgusted by it that they didn't even discuss it in public.

No, we do not need to as it is irrelevant to the subject. They put in place a framework that allowed for changes in society that they could not have foreseen and it was used to do so.

It was written in other documents, it wasn't needed in the Constitution.

It has to be in the Constitution or you have no basis to argue that it is a fundamental part of the law.

I'm not sure where you're going with this, but criminal laws against homosexuality, bestiality, and incest are based on Leviticus 18. Jesus rescinded the penalty phase in the New Testament, so there is not a requirement that homosexuals be executed solely on the act of homosexuality.

In any event, let's move this discussion to the above thread.

A US Court can overturn and declare a law null and void under the right circumstances, thus I ask the question, could a biblical court declare a law in Leviticus null and void?

 

[Kit the Coyote]

Buggery is just as prevalent today as it was back then. The only difference now is that thanks to the millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars to study HIV/AIDS, those living with it can now manage it better than before.

Yes treating the disease is usually a more effective approach.

A secular government that enforced Judeo-Christian based laws?

And Mesopotamian laws, pre-Christian Greek laws, pre-Christian Roman laws, pre-Christian British law, etc. Even some Native American laws. There are commonalities in most legal systems, such as murder being against the law. If it is based on Judeo-Christian laws, why is there no mention of it in the foundational document of our legal system and why are only four of the ten commandments have equivalents in our system?

Let's move any discussion on the Founding Fathers to this thread.

Not discussing the Founding Fathers, we are discussing the US Constitution and legal system.

One would think as much as I expose pedophilia and pederasty amongst the LGBTQ movement, that a proud and unrepentant member of that movement would want to rush forward and set the record straight.

Oh well, I guess the evidence still stands unopposed.

I know a fairly active political forum like this one on a gay porn site if you really want to go and discuss it with them.

When you say "contraceptives" you're talking about abortion pills like Mifepristone (RU-486) and Misoprostol (or Cytotec) aren't you?

No, I mean contraceptives, if I meant RU-486 I would have said abortion drugs.

 

[ok doser]

Yes treating the disease is usually a more effective approach.

speaking as a health-care professional, preventing disease is the most effective approach