-> EC>You insist on using your objections to a sex act as an objection to   
   -> EC>marriage. THAT is a classic example of a "strawman" argument.   
       
   -> You are trying to make *ME* the subject of this discussion   
      
   Not at all.  You are voicing your objections.  I am discussing those   
   objections.  A marriage is not a sex act.   
      
   -> This is a same-sex sodomite `marriage'.   
      
   A marriage is not a sex act.   
      
   -> And a male and female couple getting `married' has nothing to do with   
   sex   
   -> relations,   
      
   Obviously.   
      
   -> and the preacher `marrying' them is not a participant in that   
   -> union, either.   
      
   Obviously wrong.  A marriage doesn't happen without someone performing the   
   marriage.  A marriage can happen without a cake.  Preachers can decline to   
   perform a marriage for any number of reasons.  And preachers are not public   
   accommodations.  Which makes your example awfully irrelevant.   
      
   -> > By the way...sex between two people of the same sex is `sodomy'. It   
   has   
   -> >been defined as such since the days of Abraham and Lot, when the two   
   -> >cities Sodom and Gommorah were destroyed over the practice of   
   -> >homosexuality (among other things).   
      
   -> EC>Historically incorrect.  The Supreme Court's majority opinion in   
   Lawrence   
   -> EC>v Texas goes into the history of sodomy laws.   
      
   -> EC>http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas/Opinion_of_the_Court   
      
   -> Historically correct. To a devout, practicing Christian, the Bible   
   supercedes   
   -> any court of the United States.   
      
   -> EC>The term covers different-sex as well as same-sex, as well as a wide   
   -> EC>variety of specific sex acts.  The application you are making has   
   only   
   -> EC>been common in the last few decades.  More generally, through   
   history, the   
   -> EC>term has been used for ANY sex act that is not for the purpose of   
   -> EC>procreation.  If you really want to use the term "sodomite" to apply   
   to   
   -> EC>anyone who has given or received oral sex with anyone of either sex,   
   -> EC>anyone who has engaged in sex where either participant had a   
   vasectomy or   
   -> EC>tubal ligation, or where a condom or any other contraceptive was   
   involved,   
   -> EC>well, that would be more historically accurate, but it would not   
   support   
   -> EC>your argument very well.   
      
   The Court was not RULING on the meaning of the word!  The Court was   
   reviewing the literature on the meaning of the word!   
      
   --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5   
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 Join Us: www.DocsPlace.org (1:123/140)