From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 8 20:30:08 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78E2A37B404 for ; Thu, 8 May 2003 20:30:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (A17-250-248-89.apple.com [17.250.248.89]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F244B43F75 for ; Thu, 8 May 2003 20:30:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lomion@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin07-en2 [10.13.10.152]) by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id h493U7Ud029072 for ; Thu, 8 May 2003 20:30:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mac.com ([67.98.154.9]) (authenticated bits=0) by mac.com (Xserve/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id h48EL5pm016571; Thu, 8 May 2003 07:21:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:21:23 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552) To: Narvi From: Larry Sica In-Reply-To: <20030507211948.Y40030-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> Message-Id: <58D9FA9E-8160-11D7-86C4-000393A335A2@mac.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) cc: Doug Barton cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Senator Santorum X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 03:30:08 -0000 On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, at 02:21 PM, Narvi wrote: > > On Tue, 6 May 2003, Colin Percival wrote: > >> At 12:29 06/05/2003 -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >>> On Tue, 6 May 2003, Colin Percival wrote: >>>> Not quite. Bigamy and polygamy aren't questions of sex; they're >>>> questions of marriage. >>> >>> They are also crimes in the US, which is the point he's making. >>> Actually, >>> you're supporting my argument, even if you don't realize it. :) If we >>> decide that removing the laws against sodomy is ok because you have >>> the >>> right to do whatever you want behind closed doors, then the laws >>> against >>> the other things he mentioned should be removed too, for the same >>> reason >>> (see below for one important qualification). >> >> Bigamy isn't something which goes on behind closed doors. >> Marriage is a >> matter of public record; someone who is only a bigamist behind closed >> doors >> is no more than an adulterer. >> > > No, he need not be. He might be a polyamorist. After all, its not > adultry > if the other half of the marriage knows and agrees to it, unless you > take > some odd defintion of adultry. > It still is adultery, since adultery has nothing to do with the other parties knowledge. In some areas in the USA adultery is illegal. But the thing about it is, the law he is trying to protect does not apply to straight couples engaging in the same act. So his statments taken in context are very homophobic. That combined with the fact that he is using intentionally inflammatory language to drum up support plus his past record of comments makes it all very much anti-gay. --Larry