From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 6 15:45:39 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 E823B37B401; Tue, 6 May 2003 15:45:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta06-svc.ntlworld.com (mta06-svc.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.46]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6682443F3F; Tue, 6 May 2003 15:45:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk) Received: from piii600.wadham.ox.ac.uk ([81.103.196.4]) by mta06-svc.ntlworld.comESMTP <20030506224536.UBSC12018.mta06-svc.ntlworld.com@piii600.wadham.ox.ac.uk>; Tue, 6 May 2003 23:45:36 +0100 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.1.20030506233728.07e23528@popserver.sfu.ca> X-Sender: cperciva@popserver.sfu.ca X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 23:45:35 +0100 To: Doug Barton , Colin Percival From: Colin Percival In-Reply-To: <20030506121650.K51947@12-234-22-23.pyvrag.nggov.pbz> References: <5.0.2.1.1.20030506182557.07db3820@popserver.sfu.ca> <5.0.2.1.1.20030506182557.07db3820@popserver.sfu.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed 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: Tue, 06 May 2003 22:45:40 -0000 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. >> personally I don't see where the problem > > lies with incest, providing that no (genetically impaired) children are > > born of it, > >... and providing that all parties involved are "adults" in the sense that >they are capable of giving informed consent to the acts in question. That >of course is an entirely different topic of discussion. Of course. Most cases of incest are also cases of rape -- and they should be prosecuted as that, not as incest. > > and I can't think of any civilized state where adultery is illegal. > >The limitations of your knowledge are not my responsibility. :) To take a >trivial example, the Uniform Code of Military Justice in the US has >penalties for adultery, although I'm not enough of an expert to make the >distinction of whether it proclaims it "illegal," which is an oft-misused >term. We evidently have different definitions of "civilized". ;) Colin Percival