« Youngun's | Main | Gun Maker Liable »
April 23, 2003
Grow a Set
Sen. Santorum is trying to dance a little sidestep around his comments on the Texas sodomy case.
Santorum told Fox News that he was not equating gay couples with polygamists, adulterers and the like.
"I was not equating one to the other. There is no moral equivalency there. What I was saying was that if you say there is an absolute right to privacy for consenting adults within the home to do whatever they want, this has far reaching ramifications, which has a very serious impact on the American family and that is what I was talking about."
Beg pardon? Then what exactly was else could these comments mean?
"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual [gay] sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."
Stupid comments aside, Senator, if you'd actually Read the Damn Case, you might realize that this isn't even close to what this case is about. As I've said before here and here, this case is about the Texas sodomy statute that prohibits certain sexual conduct between homosexuals....but the same sexual conduct is permitted between heterosexual couples.
Now, as far as I know, bigamy, incest, polygamy and adultery is prohibited no matter what the gender of the participants. (Adultery? Is that still a crime somewhere?) Equating these with prohibiting sexual conduct based solely on the gender of the participants is at best intellectual dishonesty.
And yes, Senator, your comments are moral equivalency. What you are really saying is that homosexuality is morally wrong and should be prohibited because it undermines "family values". You have a right to your opinion, whether I agree or not.
So why don't you grow a set and just say what you really think? And stop misinterpreting this case to fit your own agenda.
Idjit.
Posted by Rita at April 23, 2003 07:40 AM
Comments
And are you saying that if homosexuals cannot engage in certain sexual behavior, then no one can? A basic fact that most people overlook is that LIFE IS NOT FAIR, EVEN AND BALANCED. If it is , where do I go to pick up my check? We all may be created equal by GOD, but 5th grade pysical ed class teaches you that, in truth, we are not all equal....Nice idea though.....
Posted by: Bill at April 23, 2003 10:01 AM
Nope, just saying it's a discrimination issue that has nothing to do with bigamy, polygamy, incest, et al.
Life isn't fair? Well no shit, I never said it was.
Posted by: Rita at April 23, 2003 10:59 AM
What I find interesting is that I heard something completely different. I heard him make the point that society MUST have some parameters for private behavior, not a comparison of behaviors....the fact that there is an uproar is an indication of the intolerance of homosexual activists.....
Posted by: Bill at April 24, 2003 08:57 AM
I don't care what homosexuals do as long as they're both adults and I don't have to watch 'em....just like I don't care what heterosexuals do as long as they're both adults and I don't have to watch 'em.
Posted by: Rita at April 24, 2003 04:28 PM
Rita,
I agree with you on what the law should be. If Andrew Sullivan wants to go bugger his boyfriend, that's fine by me. But where in the Constitution or, indeed, federal statue, have homosexuals been declared a protected class? The closest thing we get is Romer v. Evans, and that's not very close. Further, to be a bit tongue in cheek (unless that's illegal in Virginia, in which case I won't)heterosexual men aren't any more free to bugger another man than homosexuals, right?
Posted by: James Joyner at April 24, 2003 06:26 PM
Just because they're haven't been a protected class doesn't mean they can't be...gotta start somewhere. The state must have, at the very least, a rational basis for discrimination. And I just don't see one.
The protection of families argument is bogus and based on an unrealistic "Ozzie & Harriet" view of the ideal family. A successful family is not dependent on having Mom, Dad and 2.2 biological children. And arguably, adultery causes much more direct harm to a family.
Anti-homosexual laws are, IMO, more analogous to the laws prohibiting interracial marriages....prior to Loving, those marriages were prohibited for much the same bogus reasons.
But then, I'm not on the Court, so it doesn't really matter what I think.
: )
Posted by: Rita at April 25, 2003 06:01 AM