Santorum in defense of his beliefs - It is impossible for a law to be intolerant

[Imran Siddiqui]

taking out the dependent leaves you with this

Which is a perfectly valid statement.

i found his entire first comment

Which points out his reason for why he believes his views are not intolerant (the fabric of society argument). He simply uses the law and the SC as name dropping.

intolerance is freedom of speech, and if he took that position i'd have less of a problem with him, but the only argument he offers in his defense is that since it is the law of the land, he can't be intolerant for approving of that law, because laws are never intolerant, either that is what he suggests or he has no argument at all in his defense

Only when you ignore what you quoted. He says he is not intolerant and neither is the law. Why? Because his views go to the fabric of society, and it isn't intolerant to back the fabric of society. The law says the same thing.

I don't see him at all saying that laws and the Supreme Court can't be intolerant. If you say that, you really don't know him AT ALL (he is extremely anti-abortion).

[Imran Siddiqui]

Read his statement again:

To suggest that my comments, which are the law of the land and were the reason the Supreme Court decided the case in 1986, are somehow intolerant, I would just argue that it is not

How is this any different from me saying:

"MY views, which btw are the law and SC reasoning, are not intolerant.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Guynemer
News flash Lincoln--some strongly held religious beliefs are bigoted. Some aren't. This one, most assuredly, is.

Of course, my point was that the shoe fits more than one foot. Is it possible for a gay to be a bigot? Some of the more radical element seem to have a vehement hatred for anyone who does not kiss their anatomy (so to speak ).

[Guynemer]

How is that even remotely relevant? Of course a homosexual can be a bigot. What do you want, a cookie?

How exactly are gays being bigoted against the right honorable Senator?

[Imran Siddiqui]

'Honorable' Senator, Guy?

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Guynemer
How is that even remotely relevant? Of course a homosexual can be a bigot. What do you want, a cookie?

How exactly are gays being bigoted against the right honorable Senator?

They can't seem to tolerate anyone expressing their opinion without raising a storm of protest. They obviously cannot stand opposing opinions. That is a definition of bigot.

[uh Clem]

Bedroom cops are at it again, I see. It's hard to believe in the 21st Century that there are still twisted, filthy-minded perverts who are obsessed with what other consenting adults are doing with their bodies behind closed doors. These sickos need to get their minds out of the gutter.

Got a problem with the gender(s) of the consenting adult or adults who share my bed? There's a very simple solution: go **** yourself (assuming that's legal in your state). And take the other goosesteppers like Scalia and Ashcrack with you.

While you're at it, give up this "fabric of society" horse**** excuse; nobody believes you anyway. It's merely a call for expanded state power, and everybody knows it.

"Right to privacy" has nothing to do with it. Where do you get off telling me whether I can or can't have voluntary, private sex with another adult. We've got college boys, some of them virgins perhaps, making suggestions for how to regulate others' sex lives??? That's too funny even to ridicule.

Oooohh, wait a minute! You say your Sky Buddy tells you to act this way. Ohh, that's so different...as Betty Bowers, America's Best Chistian, puts it, "God Told Me To Hate You!"

Right.

[Ben Kenobi]

It isn't a streach at all to apply the 'right to privacy' to bigamy and polygamy.

Imran:

If you are right on this, than Santorium is also correct in his main point.

MtG:

I think your analysis is less than honest for Imran's point. Just because you disagree with Santorium in one thing, it does not mean that he is wrong on everything, particularly in the capacity of the law.

So please show me why this right to privacy cannot encompass polygamy as well as bigamy?

Korn:

is either adultery or incest actually illegal in the same way that sodomy is? I mean can you goto prison for having sex with someone other than your spouse? If so is that law enforced at all? Can two blood related adults actually goto prison for having consensual sex or does it just bar them from marriage?

Interesting point Korn. You point out to a flaw in the legal system, and argue that the system should be consistent, The problem with this argument, is that I could argue men should be put in jail for abusing their wives in such a matter as adultery, and thus correct the problem.

What bothers me is not the ban on sodomy, so much as the apparent double-standard. Why should there be a different law for a husband on a one-night stand with a man?

certainly when one says that engaging in gay acts destroys the fabric of society, then that is implying it is fundamentally bad, also that undermines his "i hate the sin, not the sinner" line of argument intended to shield him from being intolerant

No. You do not understand the point. The whole idea behind love the sinner, hate the sin is that one's sexuality does not equate one's identity. Therefore, in removing homosexual practice, one would still accomodate the person.

Uh Clem:

Thanks for helping Lincoln prove his position.

[uh Clem]

obiwan18, as long as there are people who hallucinate that they have some sort of divine mandate to run my life (with the help of the gummint, of course), I'll just have to keep on abusing them.

You stop, I'll stop.

Edit: And if they claim a mandate to run my sex life, then I'll invite them to get the tenderest portions of their anatomy intertwined with old, rusty, and complicated machinery.

[HolyWarrior]

Demonrat hypocrisy--here we go again!

When Patty murray made her remarks about how osama bin laden has done so much good to the arab world and the right criticized her for those remarks, the left kept reminding us of her right to free speech. Watch how soon they forget their lessons of free speech in regards to Senator Santorum..

and didn't anyone notice that the reporter who interviewed Santorum is married to the campaign manager of Senator (and presidential hopeful) John Kerry.?

[Ben Kenobi]

Uh clem:

as long as there are people who hallucinate that they have some sort of divine mandate to run my life (with the help of the gummint, of course), I'll just have to keep on abusing them.

You are the only one making the argument from a religious perspective either pro or con. The remainder of the thread has been solely concerned with what does the law say.

Do you know anything about the right to privacy in the US constitution?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Obi, I do believe I am correct on that. A right to privacy that allows freedom from the government in the bedroom cannot prohibit polygamy except for good (compelling) reason. Morals aren't a compelling reason to take away the right to marry and the right to privacy from these people. That it is against Equal Protection to give the right to marry to one on one relationships but not to more than that.

It is simply because Substantive Due Process is simply code for "What morals we want to promote" that bans on polygamy don't violate the Constitution.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Whats wrong with Polygamy? and what is Bigamy?

[uh Clem]

You are the only one making the argument from a religious perspective either pro or con.

Read Lincoln's posts. I alluded to religion in only the last paragraph of that first post.

If you want to regulate my behavior, then ALL...100%...of the burden of proof falls on you. It's not up to me to justify my behavior; it's up to you to prove why it deserves condemnation. As I said, I don't appeal to a court under some "right to privacy." Rather, I demand that these government employees justify their intrusion into my life.

Under what was once quaintly called "a republican form of government," this would not be a controversial or exceptional position.

Of course, people who think that the function of government is to jail people who perform politically incorrect sex will see it differently.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Whats wrong with incest? As long as it is consensual, it is nobody's business.