Soulhuntre
Posts: 223
Joined: 9/29/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: pinkpleasures i suggest that those of us in a position to do so form a Political Action Committee and fight this repressive and unconstitutional effort. It is sexual McCartyism and unless we speak up, the religous right will be hunting us like dogs. Interested peopel are far, far better off supporting an organization that already exists. In things like this "size" matters. quote:
ORIGINAL: gypsyeyez Since Bush came into office we cannot smoke in resturants in most states .... You cannot honestly believe that the smoking bans are a result of any Bush policy do you? quote:
ORIGINAL: gypsyeyez Now we are not allowed to talk about our lifestyle with other like minded adults.... Of course we are. HEll TES in NY still holds 3-4 meetings a week that are well publicized and well atttended. Chat rooms till flourish, organizations still flourish, the clubs are still open. There is only ONE area where our freedoms are currently under attachk... it is an important one to be sure, but it is still only the one. Currently graphic descriptions of S/M actions may be considered "obscene" under a law that has not jet had a Supreme Court challenge. Is it a problem? Sure. Is it somehting to fight? Of course. But lets not pretend that the KGB is kicking in doors and beating us up. It isnt true. quote:
ORIGINAL: Dadddy Here's something I don't quite understand. For most people who think any sexuality is evil, it's a moral issue, right? Well, aren't morals tied in with most religious faiths? Isn't all of this censorship just a really blatant example of non-separation of church and state? No, it is not. Elected officials are absolutely allowed to use their moral and ethical judgement when making decisions. That is part of the reason we elect them. To say that they should throw away their personal ethics is silly as woudl it be not only silly but unconstitutional to disqualify from office anyone who was deeply religeous. The speration of church and state has only one intention - that the state will establish no "official" or "national" faith above any other. It was, by the way, intended to protect the ability of religeous faiths to influence policy by making sure o single faith had all the power. It was in no way intended to prevent religeous influence. It certainly does not mean that people cannot make decisions based upon their individual faith.
|