‘Homosexual Conduct Should Be Illegal,’ Roy Moore Said in ‘05 Interview

[Emjay]

That is true, but the Dems will use this against him.  Also, I was being sarcastic.

Yes, they will use it against Moore and with great glee.

And it was a stupid thing to say which he said 12 years ago.  He may have evolved on that position and he will surely be questioned about it, so we'll see.

But, it's still Alabama and I still want him to win just because.

[TomSea]

Excellent point.  And don't take my tax dollars to fix all the diseases you get from those activities.  Or to kill the unwanted product of those activities.  (When will an innocent baby in the most private space possible, mommy's womb, get a Constitutional right to life?)  Don't use tax dollars to peddle those nasty behaviors to school children.  On and on.....the pro homo crowd does not want freedom.  Remember when they were for states rights on the marriage issue?  They don't want a constitutional republic.  They don't even want freedom. Otherwise those who see homosexuality as sin would not be being targeted by them now.  They want their own way, to glorify the perverse and to suppress, shame and make illegal all dissent.

I've used this reasoning too; but then, you will have people who say "don't spend my taxpayer dollars on your wars" or other causes; everyone then, can start complaining about what they don't want the government to pay for.

[XenaLee]

Except we are now all exposed since they have now started allowing homosexuals to donate blood.

Exactly.  And how would a victim of 'bad blood' get justice?  Could they even prove that the infusion they received caused their HIV condition?  I doubt it.  Political Correctness and the hospitals CYA would prohibit any justice in those cases. 

[roamer_1]

Yes, yes it is. 

If conservatives would stick to small government and get the hell out of regulating sex ... maybe, just maybe voters would take your opinions seriously.

@Right_in_Virginia

An absolutely insane position.
'Small Government' cannot be achieved without regulating sex. The entire time we had small government, sex was regulated harshly.

*Just* in terms of no-fault divorce and single-parent homes with bastard children... Leave the homos out of it for a minute... Just standard fornication and adultery make our burgeoning welfare state necessary.

Indeed, if you want small government, regulating sexual behavior is needful. Big government requires and endorses sexual 'freedom', because the resulting welfare state is what gives it power.

And don't think for a minute that the government is not regulating the bedroom right now - It's failure to regulate is a regulation in it's own right. When government assaults marriage, and allows virtually anything but, that government has made a moral choice - And we are living with the consequences.

So in fact, your entire premise is foolishness.

[truth_seeker]

Make a child you can't pay for,  and the government should insist your nuts get snipped and the woman's tubes tied.    You may pawn one of your offspring off on the rest of us,   but we ought to have a right to stop you if you are going to try to do it again.

Now that is some pretty stern body part regulating, for sure. I wonder if Judge Roy Moore agrees.

[Emjay]

First off, it was 2005, when social conservatism still had a following.
Second, this is Alabama, where this kind of sentiment isn't fatal. Yet.
Third, pretty much everyone has known that Roy Moore is a socon.
Fourth, it is fully consistent with Moore's views regarding law and the courts. This was shortly after Lawrence v. Texas declared sodomy a constitutional right and struck down an Alabama law making it illegal. Moore has been a consistent critic of that kind of judicial activism.
Fifth, the alphabet soup lobby has overextended itself horribly as of late and to assume they have the empathy they used to have would be a grave error.

This doesn't have to be fatal.

I cannot even believe this thread and I knew I shouldn't have clicked on it.

While I'm hoping that Judge Moore has modified his position (stated 12 years ago) I still cannot believe that so many people want to go back to the Dark Ages regarding homosexuality.

There has always been homosexuality way back in history.  It does not hurt straight people at all.
And don't come back at me about aids.  This attitude existed well before aids. 

God loves homosexuals .... and adulterers, although he doesn't care that much for adulterers.

If anyone here actually wants to put the government in charge of what's legal and what's not in matters of sex, that person needs to see a shrink.

Do you even realize what avenues to abuse that would open to the government?

Oh, my God !!

I am sick reading this thread.

[XenaLee]

Any sane culture discourages, at a minimum, those behaviours which are destructive to the individual, because they are destructive to the society as well.

How is it that tobacco smokers are treated as pariahs, but homosexuality is somehow 'okay'?


The law cannot effectively change individual moral behaviour, but it can discourage it. At least get it out of the streets.

Excellent analogy, Joe.  It is the typical leftist meme of government picking winners and losers and punishing the losers they "deem" as losers.  And odd also that they picked on smokers as a major threat to insurers.... when gays had already been a HUGE cost to insurers.... and still is.

That said, if government had cracked down on gays back in the 70s and 80s.... (back in my liberal days in Houston).....most of the gay male friends I knew back then would still be alive, probably.  As it is, one by one they died of AIDs over the next ten years or so.

[XenaLee]

I cannot even believe this thread and I knew I shouldn't have clicked on it.

While I'm hoping that Judge Moore has modified his position (stated 12 years ago) I still cannot believe that so many people want to go back to the Dark Ages regarding homosexuality.

There has always been homosexuality way back in history.  It does not hurt straight people at all.
And don't come back at me about aids.  This attitude existed well before aids. 

God loves homosexuals .... and adulterers, although he doesn't care that much for adulterers.

If anyone here actually wants to put the government in charge of what's legal and what's not in matters of sex, that person needs to see a shrink.

Do you even realize what avenues to abuse that would open to the government?

Oh, my God !!

I am sick reading this thread.

L M A O !!!   Sorry....but.... I really gotta call you out on that one.

First of all, how would you know how God feels about homosexuals vs. adulterers?  Does he whisper in your ear or something?    

As for adulterers, you might want to check on the head of the Catholic church for their recent stance on how God supposedly views adulterers.  I believe they're going to allow them to take communion now.  So it doesn't sound like He "doesn't care much" for them now, does it.

Also..... you really need to take a chill pill.   ^-^

[Smokin Joe]

Perhaps if He is still out their circumnavigating His vast universe, He needs to swing by this spinning mud ball again, and reissue the guide.

There are plenty of copies available. It is the all-time best selling book, still.

[Smokin Joe]

Yes, yes it is. 

If conservatives would stick to small government and get the hell out of regulating sex ... maybe, just maybe voters would take your opinions seriously.

So you would advocate not regulating prostitution?

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

So all you care about is that an R is in there. Not that anything worthwhile gets done. Got'cha.

Darn straight.  Just imagine where we'd be if McCain had lost to a Democrat.

[INVAR]

Perhaps if He is still out their circumnavigating His vast universe, He needs to swing by this spinning mud ball again, and reissue the guide.

We already have one, and this people have no use for it.

So why should the Almighty reissue it when this People really want nothing to do with Him except pray for limos and cash raining down on them from heaven?

They are not interested in doing what He says.

In fact, what He says, is now regarded as Evil.

[roamer_1]

God loves homosexuals .... and adulterers, although he doesn't care that much for adulterers.

Actually, YHWH DESPISES both homosexuality AND adultery. Both are enumerated abominations, for which the very land will spit you out.

If anyone here actually wants to put the government in charge of what's legal and what's not in matters of sex, that person needs to see a shrink.

Do you even realize what avenues to abuse that would open to the government?

WTF are you even talking about @Emjay ? Your government is teaching my children to be sexually active - Teaching transgenderism, and gender fluidity to prepubescent children. Normalizing homosexuality and a 'free sex' mentality... Your government allows my daughter to have an abortion without my knowledge. Your government teaches my children virtually every sort of sexual aberration - including anal sex as preferrable to avoid pregnancy...   

Exactly what OTHER abuses are there that top these?

Just go ahead and embrace liberalism, because that is what you are preaching.
There can be *NO* small government that is capable of governing a licentious people.

[driftdiver]

L M A O !!!   Sorry....but.... I really gotta call you out on that one.

First of all, how would you know how God feels about homosexuals vs. adulterers?  Does he whisper in your ear or something?    

As for adulterers, you might want to check on the head of the Catholic church for their recent stance on how God supposedly views adulterers.  I believe they're going to allow them to take communion now.  So it doesn't sound like He "doesn't care much" for them now, does it.

Also..... you really need to take a chill pill.   ^-^

@XenaLee

Because he's told us.

[XenaLee]

@XenaLee

Because he's told us.

He has told us that he cares less for adulterers than he cares for homosexuals?  (which is what Emjay basically implied in her statement.... which is what I responded to).

Please show me that passage(s) in the Bible then.

[Smokin Joe]

I've used this reasoning too; but then, you will have people who say "don't spend my taxpayer dollars on your wars" or other causes; everyone then, can start complaining about what they don't want the government to pay for.

Sorry, I have already heard that tune about cigarette smoking and not wearing a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet or buying raw milk or any number of things the individual does but our government regulates or tries to regulate "for the public good".

You might get cancer if you smoke, you might hit your head IF you wreck your motorcycle, you might wreck your car, or get sick from raw milk.

Roughly 20% of the male homosexual population is known to be HIV/AIDS infected, (source:https://carm.org/statistics-percentage-population-hiv-infected).

That's a death sentence for one in five (20%). Those rates are tremendous compared to any other potentially lethal activity out there which is tolerated.

By contrast,

There are an estimated 8-25 attempted suicides to one completion (12.5%-4%);...

(source: https://www.healthyplace.com/depression/articles/suicide-statistics-for-completed-suicides-and-attempted-suicides/), which is a significantly lower death rate.

[INVAR]

I cannot even believe this thread and I knew I shouldn't have clicked on it.

While I'm hoping that Judge Moore has modified his position (stated 12 years ago) I still cannot believe that so many people want to go back to the Dark Ages regarding homosexuality.

In 12 years you will be saying the same thing about pedophelia and "child marriages".

There has always been homosexuality way back in history.  It does not hurt straight people at all.

Tell that to Lot.

God loves homosexuals .... and adulterers,

What scripture did you pull out of your areas that says God loves those who practice sin?

Oh, my God !!

I am sick reading this thread.

Then treat this thread like you do the bible, and don't read it.

[INVAR]

Just go ahead and embrace liberalism, because that is what you are preaching.
There can be *NO* small government that is capable of governing a licentious people.

Exactly.

"We have no Government armed with Power capable of contending with human Passions unbridled by morality and Religion. Avarice, Ambition, and Revenge or Galantry, would break the strongest Cords of our Constitution as a Whale goes through a Net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other" - John Adams 1789

[XenaLee]

Sorry, I have already heard that tune about cigarette smoking and not wearing a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet or buying raw milk or any number of things the individual does but our government regulates or tries to regulate "for the public good".

You might get cancer if you smoke, you might hit your head IF you wreck your motorcycle, you might wreck your car, or get sick from raw milk.

Roughly 20% of the male homosexual population is known to be HIV/AIDS infected, (source:https://carm.org/statistics-percentage-population-hiv-infected).

That's a death sentence for one in five (20%). Those rates are tremendous compared to any other potentially lethal activity out there which is tolerated.

By contrast,  (source: https://www.healthyplace.com/depression/articles/suicide-statistics-for-completed-suicides-and-attempted-suicides/), which is a significantly lower death rate.

Including a whole bunch of heterosexual folks..... and including celebrities (See:  Charlie Sheen).

It's a contagion-via-sex disease.  What used to affect mostly gays is spread also to non-gays.  And for some reason, government refused to "regulate" that public health risk activity.  Odd, that.

[Smokin Joe]

Darn straight.  Just imagine where we'd be if McCain had lost to a Democrat.

We'd have a Democrat voting with the Democrats instead of another guy with an 'R'?

[mountaineer]

What scripture did you pull out of your areas that says God loves those who practice sin?

John 3:16, perhaps.

[aligncare]

@Right_in_Virginia
I'm saying the government already regulates everything else in the bedroom so "saying the govt should stay out of the bedroom" is nonsense.

The Word of God says its a sin.  If people choose to go against the word of God a law written by men isn't going to make much difference.   It hasn't in the past several thousand years anyway.

Just a little pet peeve here. It’s silly that people are finding the wrong things to argue about.

It would save a lot of time if they would simply stop using euphemistic phraseology like government should stay “out of the bedroom” to, government shouldn’t regulate “private sexual behavior” or just, “homosexuality.”

I do lots of things in my bedroom that doesn’t involve sexual behavior, primarily sleep, so using the example of illicit drugs in the bedroom, or the products found in the bedroom regulated by the government missess the salient point of this issue.

This small change will help put many points on a better track without a lot of blah blah. Carry on.

[DiogenesLamp]

I normally don't quote and entire post but this one I will. It is that good.

Thank you.  It just seems like plain old common sense to me,  and it baffles me why this approach isn't obvious to everyone. 

[aligncare]

@driftdiver .... Regulating the mechanics of the bedroom itself is not---by any stretch of the imagination--the equivalent of regulating adult human behavior.  I suggest you find a different strategy.

I should have read on a bit before opening my mouth. Ooo, bad choice of words on a homosexuality thread.

[truth_seeker]

everyone then, can start complaining about what they don't want the government to pay for.

Well, it IS their money. Hypothetical; small town with limited police force man-hours.  Make priority list for which crimes to pursue?

--Consensual adult sex (same sex)
--Adult drug use
--Rape
--Murder
--Robbery
--Assault and battery
--Pedophilia on computer
--Child molestation
--Adultery (opposite sex)
--Polygamy
--Adult sale of drugs to minors
--Unsafe bedding and sleepwear
--Political corruption
--Election fraud
--Hacking personal information for theft
--Fomenting public violence
--Treason
--add your priorities