" Tom DeLay: Justice Dept. Wants to Legalize 12 'Perversions' "

[Hupomone10]

Out of all the countries that have made SSM legal, almost all of them have since moved to make inappropriate behavior with animals illegal or already had laws again inappropriate behavior with animals.
I think Brazil, Spain and Argentina are the only exceptions because they never had any inappropriate behavior with animals laws, it has always been legal there.

None of those countries (some of which have had SSM for more than 10 years) have made any moves towards legalizing polygamy or incest or anything like that...

Why do you think they moved to do so after SSM was legalized? The shallow answer would be "because they didn't do so before;" but I'm looking for the why.

Regards,
H.

 

[Desk trauma]

Does anyone know if there are laws against a person eating feces, or food with botulism in it (not giving it to another person, just preventing them personally from doing so)?

Why should the state intervene in either case?

 

[Hupomone10]

Why should the state intervene in either case?

By either case, do you mean inappropriate behavior with animals and eating feces? Or are you referring to feces and botulism?

 

[Desk trauma]

By either case, do you mean inappropriate behavior with animals and eating feces? Or are you referring to feces and botulism?

Feces and botulism, hence my quoting that section of the post.

 

[Cearbhall]

In scriptures, sodomy was a tipping point for a society to swiftly decay into wholesale corruption.

You still never clarified what you mean when you say "sodomy," or whether you recognize that this group includes many heterosexual couples...

 

[Belk]

I did notice no proof was offered that the "memo" in the OP existed anywhere outside of Mr DeLay's imagination. Did you see this part of the article in the OP:

you know what they call that in the real world? that's "not proof"
tulc(really liked the book "Alas Babylon" when he was young)

Belk (Also an avid reader who enjoyed Alas Babylon)

 

[Glass*Soul]

In scriptures, sodomy was a tipping point for a society to swiftly decay into wholesale corruption. At which point, drastic measures were taken to eradicate them from the people, like a cancer cut from a body member. Any new developments in the world concerning this issue, will be viewed in the same manner and dealt with by God, same as He ever has, regardless how we men might consider it.

And, of course, by sodomy you mean the biblical definition: lack of hospitality, pride, fullness of bread, fatness and sleekness, idleness, and a failure to care for widows, orphans, the poor, the needy and the oppressed. So, yeah, I agree. These are societal tipping points.

I say, lets pass some laws against this nation-damning sort of sodomy.

 

[Hupomone10]

Why should the state intervene in either case?

I'll start, then, with something I suspect we could agree on: why should the state intervene concerning how much soda a person should drink? Here

On moral issues, however, I believe they are right to intervene. And that's the sticker: the liberals in New York City, following Michele Obama's lead, possibly feel that how much soda a person drinks is a moral issue. Hence, my Gandalf comment about "replacing reason for madness." I personally consider inappropriate behavior with animals socially and morally reprehensible, how much soda a person drinks not so much.

 

[bhsmte]

I'll start, then, with something I suspect we could agree on: why should the state intervene concerning how much soda a person should drink? Here

On moral issues, however, I believe they are right to intervene. And that's the sticker: the liberals in New York City, following Michele Obama's lead, possibly feel that how much soda a person drinks is a moral issue. Hence, my Gandalf comment about "replacing reason for madness." I personally consider inappropriate behavior with animals socially and morally reprehensible, how much soda a person drinks not so much.

That whole soda restriction was and is one of the biggest jokes, I have ever seen.

They are selling cigarettes in the same place they are restricting soda. If anyone can make sense out of that, good luck.

 

[NightHawkeye]

That whole soda restriction was and is one of the biggest jokes, I have ever seen.

They are selling cigarettes in the same place they are restricting soda. If anyone can make sense out of that, good luck.

"They" also killed an entrepreneur recently for simply selling single cigarettes.

 

[bhsmte]

"They" also killed an entrepreneur recently for simply selling single cigarettes.

Who killed who?

 

[NightHawkeye]

Does the name Eric Garner ring a bell?

 

[Armoured]

I'll start, then, with something I suspect we could agree on: why should the state intervene concerning how much soda a person should drink? Here

On moral issues, however, I believe they are right to intervene. And that's the sticker: the liberals in New York City, following Michele Obama's lead, possibly feel that how much soda a person drinks is a moral issue. Hence, my Gandalf comment about "replacing reason for madness." I personally consider inappropriate behavior with animals socially and morally reprehensible, how much soda a person drinks not so much.

The difference, of course, being that excessive soft drink consumption leads demonstrably to health issues. So, while I don't agree with "banning" soft drinks, (which, IIRC, no one actually did), trying to make people mindful of it is just basic public health best practice.

 

[bhsmte]

The difference, of course, being that excessive soft drink consumption leads demonstrably to health issues. So, while I don't agree with "banning" soft drinks, (which, IIRC, no one actually did), trying to make people mindful of it is just basic public health best practice.

You are correct of course that excessive consumption of soft drinks is unhealthy and can lead to obesity. With that said, when those same stores are limited in the size of the soft drink, but sell cartons of cigarettes to customers, don't you think that is a little out of whack, if health is the concern?

 

[Armoured]

You are correct of course that excessive consumption of soft drinks is unhealthy and can lead to obesity. With that said, when those same stores are limited in the size of the soft drink, but sell cartons of cigarettes to customers, don't you think that is a little out of whack, if health is the concern?

I think "trying to make people mindful of it is just basic public health best practice" when we're talking cigarettes, too. I don't really think any product should be flat out banned. I have no problem with the government mandating that consumers have access to all relevent information, and even though serving sizes is wildly unevenly policed, I don't have an objection to serving size in principle.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the whole soft drink furore over the size of container offered? i.e. anyone could drink however much he chose, although drinking an unhealthy amount required buying two or more of a smaller size cup rather than one big one?

 

[The Cadet]

In scriptures, sodomy was a tipping point for a society to swiftly decay into wholesale corruption. At which point, drastic measures were taken to eradicate them from the people, like a cancer cut from a body member. Any new developments in the world concerning this issue, will be viewed in the same manner and dealt with by God, same as He ever has, regardless how we men might consider it.

Yeah, Netherlands has been a horrid wasteland since 2000, when gay marriage was legalized.

 

[bhsmte]

"They" also killed an entrepreneur recently for simply selling single cigarettes.

What do the police do to the store clerks selling carton's of cigarettes?

 

[bhsmte]

I think "trying to make people mindful of it is just basic public health best practice" when we're talking cigarettes, too. I don't really think any product should be flat out banned. I have no problem with the government mandating that consumers have access to all relevent information, and even though serving sizes is wildly unevenly policed, I don't have an objection to serving size in principle.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the whole soft drink furore over the size of container offered? i.e. anyone could drink however much he chose, although drinking an unhealthy amount required buying two or more of a smaller size cup rather than one big one?

I don't know what their motivation was.

All I know is, when this person that is limited in the size of the soft drink they can purchase, can walk up to the counter and buy a carton of cigarettes, health concerns don't seem to be in play here.

And I agree, none of these things should be banned, I just find it a feeble attempt to do anything beneficial.

 

[NightHawkeye]

What do the police do to the store clerks selling carton's of cigarettes?

Tax 'em.

 

[Armoured]

Yeah, Netherlands has been a horrid wasteland since 2000, when gay marriage was legalized.

*insert mandatory "yeah, but America is a special case" demand here