The next fight on the hill. Repealing bestiality laws?

posted at 8:25 pm on December 9, 2011 by Jazz Shaw

The defense spending authorization bill has many a slip twixt the cup and the lip, as they say, but there’s one piece in there which is raising a few eyebrows. It involves a long standing statue in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) which states… and I’m just quoting here… “unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy.”

Alright then. So how did this get in the bill?

As the final Defense authorization bill gets hammered out in conference committee, one surprising issue is riling both social conservatives and animal rights activists: the repeal of a ban on sodomy and bestiality…

But the article is still included in the House bill, and House Republicans want it to remain in the final bill.

News of the bestiality repeal has sparked conservative groups like the Family Research Council to warn of a “campaign to radicalize the country from the Pentagon out,” even if the intent to repeal bestiality wasn’t there. The group likened the repeal to last year’s end of the military’s “Don’t ask, don’t tell” rule on gays serving openly in the military.

“In its rush to accommodate the Left, Congress may have inadvertently opened the door to even more perversion,” Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said in a statement. “In its haste to make gay sex an official part of military life, the Left could be unintentionally repealing the ban on bestiality too.”

Before we get too carried away, this doesn’t seem to be a case of the military suddenly endorsing the idea of marrying your horse. But given recent changes to the rules, they may have made an overly broad deletion to long standing rules. Plus, such offenses would still be covered elsewhere.

The Pentagon, however, says that even if the article in the military code was repealed, having sex with animals would still be covered under different statutes.

“It is difficult to envision a situation where a service member engages in sexual conduct with an animal that would not be conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline or service-discrediting,” said Defense spokesman Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale.

This was never the intent of the changes to the code, but clearly we’ll have to drag it out of the barn and into the public courtyard of scrutiny. Closing question: How much would you like to bet that this gets picked up on Letterman and Jon Stewart by Monday night?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

(Video)

Reporter asks Carney: Does Obama ‘Approve or Disapprove of Bestiality in Our Armed Forces?’
Added: 7 hours ago Occurred On: Dec-6-2011

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=374_1323225951
*********************************************

Reporter asks Carney: Does Obama ‘Approve or Disapprove of Bestiality in Our Armed Forces?’
Posted on December 6, 2011 at 7:47pm
************************************
************************************

The odd, if not uproarious exchange went something like this:

KINSOLVING: The Family Research Council and CNS News both reported a 93-to-7 U.S. Senate vote to approve a defense authorization bill that, quote, “includes a provision which not only repeals the military law on sodomy, but also repeals the military ban on sex with animals, or bestiality.” Does the commander-in-chief approve or disapprove of bestiality in our armed forces?

CARNEY: I don’t have any comment on–I don’t have any comment on that. Let me go to another question.

KINSOLVING: Does the President believe this will be approved by all animal support groups, such as –

CARNEY: Let’s get to something more serious.
(More….)
===========

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/reporter-asks-carney-does-obama-approve-or-disapprove-of-bestiality-in-our-armed-forces/

canopfor on December 7, 2011 at 5:15 AM

canopfor on December 7, 2011 at 8:28 PM

canopfor on December 9, 2011 at 8:30 PM

Wow. Who cares?

libertarianlunatic on December 9, 2011 at 8:30 PM

My little fuzzy, wuzzy.

Smedley on December 9, 2011 at 8:30 PM

D@mn good lookin’ animal there.
/

Electrongod on December 9, 2011 at 8:31 PM

It involves a long standing statue in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) which states… and I’m just quoting here… “unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy.”
=========================================

Common Sense,dictates,that an Exit,is not an Entrance!
(snark)

canopfor on December 9, 2011 at 8:32 PM

h/t Cyncook

Dirty Deeds Done With Sheep

sharrukin on December 9, 2011 at 8:32 PM

Kinda embarrassing, when all they wanna do is put it into military law that sodomy is okay. Repealing the ban on bestiality is for the next generation. Sloppy; it looks like they’re jumping the gun.

The gears of decadence grind slowly but surely.

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 8:33 PM

It’s for the moslems.

Love,
Buh-huh-rock.

Key West Reader on December 9, 2011 at 8:33 PM

I love my dogs, but I’m not in love with them.

rbj on December 9, 2011 at 8:33 PM

First (afterBishop)

EWWWW!

But seriously I have to believe that our military would take care of this in their own way without intervention of laws etc. I can’t even believe we need to talk about this

FLconservative on December 9, 2011 at 8:34 PM

As I recall, there were plenty of studs, a couple heifers and even a few chickens in my battalion. None I wanted to marry. :)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 9, 2011 at 8:35 PM

I think this is a case of “Oops, we didn’t actually read what was in the provision that we repealed” rather than congress intentionally repealing a law against bestiality. But, nevertheless, people will overreact to this, and blow it out of proportion like always. I see that the AFA, as always, already has a head-start on hyperbolic claims and the use of the slippery slope fallacy.

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 8:35 PM

Barney Frank is in a lather about this…

… Oh, wait!

Eeeeewwwwwwwww…!

Seven Percent Solution on December 9, 2011 at 8:37 PM

We reflect back,to the Man and Wombat Escapade!
===============================================

Bombshell:

Man raped by wombat may have been lying
***************************************
posted at 7:12 pm on March 27, 2008 by Allahpundit

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/03/27/bombshell-man-raped-by-wombat-may-have-been-lying/
============================

I see a Hollywood movie begging to be made by some wacko.

Its a story about a man and his dog,alone together on
Dogback Barking Mountain,the ups and downs,a surreal
look at love lost,love gained,inspirational and yet
so sick,you’ll laugh and you’ll cry!You will never be
so moved and touched,an absolute must see,5 *stars!
(Snark)

canopfor on March 27, 2008 at 7:53 PM

canopfor on December 9, 2011 at 8:38 PM

It’s the fundamental fallacy of government regulation. You can’t trust government officials to demonstrate common sense judgement so you have to regulate every possible thing, and still it’s not enough because of the argument over what the regulations mean.

Once you get to the point where the regulations are contradictory, you have gone full circle back to the need for government officials to demonstrate common sense judgement.

“That government which governs least, governs best.”

Skandia Recluse on December 9, 2011 at 8:38 PM

I guess Jazz is too busy writing about this to apologize for his blatant hit piece on Romeny this morning now that it has been debunked. Figures.

Ruiner on December 9, 2011 at 8:38 PM

Kinda embarrassing, when all they wanna do is put it into military law that sodomy is okay.- spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 8:33 PM

FYI – Sodomy has been fine as long as it is committed by heterosexuals.

SC.Charlie on December 9, 2011 at 8:40 PM

Only once if you swear there will never be another ewe…

ajacksonian on December 9, 2011 at 8:40 PM

It’s for the moslems.

Love,
Buh-huh-rock.

Key West Reader on December 9, 2011 at 8:33 PM

My thoughts exactly. Moooohamed did love his goats.
The question is, did he “know” them in the Biblical (or should I say the “Koranic”) sense.

predator on December 9, 2011 at 8:42 PM

O/T
=====

Supreme Court blocks use of Texas state legislative and congressional district maps that were drawn by federal judges to boost minorities’ voting power
33 Mins. ago

http://www.breakingnews.com/
============================

High court halts new Texas electoral maps
Updated 57 Mins.ago
*******************

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45619410

canopfor on December 9, 2011 at 8:43 PM

Oh my goodness, this is baaaaaaaaad. All the sheep are nervous tonight. LOL Jazz, do you still have your wellies?

simkeith on December 9, 2011 at 8:44 PM

h/t Cyncook

Dirty Deeds Done With Sheep

sharrukin on December 9, 2011 at 8:32 PM

sharrukin:Too funny…thanks!:)

canopfor on December 9, 2011 at 8:44 PM

Barney Frank is in a lather about this…

… Oh, wait!

Eeeeewwwwwwwww…!

Seven Percent Solution on December 9, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Seven Percent Solution:

While,ahem,sheering Sheep,in da basement….hahaha!:)

canopfor on December 9, 2011 at 8:45 PM

It’s times like this I really miss Hunter S Thompson…..A Dog Took My Place.

Dr Evil on December 9, 2011 at 8:45 PM

I’m almost positive that I don’t understand what is going on with this.

Count to 10 on December 9, 2011 at 8:47 PM

Just reading the title of this post sickens me at what has happened to what was once considered the greatest country on earth.

Flora Duh on December 9, 2011 at 8:47 PM

It matters because there will be a troop that will try it out. Guaranteed. We tell soldiers that they’ll face the 9 planes of hell if they drink and drive and get busted, then we have them get a DUI ON POST, within 100 meters of their baracks (then we fine them, work them to death and finally, throw them out with an “other than honerable” discharge). Happens all the time. If they don’t put a serious disincentive to engage in bad conduct, then it will happen all the time. They opened the door to tatoos everywhere and “morale turpitude” waivers, and now there’s problems. The current Sergeant Major of the Army is trying to crack down on all of it because the current crop of soldiers look and (to some extent, act) like a bunch of gang-bangers.

John_G on December 9, 2011 at 8:48 PM

While,ahem,sheering Sheep,in da basement….hahaha!:)

canopfor on December 9, 2011 at 8:45 PM

Barney Frank’s favorite commercial…

/

:)

Seven Percent Solution on December 9, 2011 at 8:49 PM

Rick Santorum: “I guess ya could say this is my wheelhouse”

Lawdawg86 on December 9, 2011 at 8:49 PM

FYI – Sodomy has been fine as long as it is committed by heterosexuals.

Read the law again. Sodomy is currently illegal for heterosexual or homosexual relations in the UCMJ. The reason the liberals want it out is because the statute terms it “unnatural.” This is the ultimate heresy for PC Cadets, that the essence of homosexual relations (sodomy) be officially considered unnatural. The whole edifice of the gay agenda is built upon the phony notion that homosexuality is normal, natural, right, and in every way equal to heterosexuality.

They don’t care about the animals part. Yet.

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 8:50 PM

Barney Frank is in a lather about this…

… Oh, wait!

I think it makes him feel rather sheepish.

predator on December 9, 2011 at 8:50 PM

Unfortunately for Frances the Talking Mule, this law changes comes 50 years too late. /Sarc.

glcinpdx on December 9, 2011 at 8:50 PM

Yep, wrote about this on Tuesday.

The Nanny Goat State:
http://takimag.com/article/the_nanny_goat_state#axzz1g5nKDnAR

I think I’m gonna have to get another homepage… Sigh…

ConservativeTalkRadio on December 9, 2011 at 8:51 PM

Washington D.C. Where the men are men and the sheep are nervous.

katy the mean old lady on December 9, 2011 at 8:54 PM

It’s not the military, but my friends from Utah said sodomizing animals is legal there. They tried to pass a law to ban it but it lacked support.

CorporatePiggy on December 9, 2011 at 8:55 PM

When my brother, a 20 yr career Army Officer, passed way 3 yrs ago, I never thought there would come a time that I would be glad he wasn’t around. Sadly, that time has now come.

Flora Duh on December 9, 2011 at 8:56 PM

The next fight on the hill. Repealing bestiality laws?

Repealing bestiality laws are a start, I suppose.

But I will not rest until marriage between man and beast is legalized!

listens2glenn on December 9, 2011 at 8:57 PM

I suppose the bitter-clingers and bible-thumpers will display the same heartless opposition to sex with animals as they have to interracial and gay sex. Wow! Such species-centric people!

The government has no business checking into what consenting adults of the same or different phyla do behind closed bedroom or barn doors.

And we will have the same religious facists saying that my horse and I should not be allowed to adopt or attend Penn State. The Westboro Baptist folks will show up shouting “God hates chickens!”

Keep the Government Out of the Doghouses of America!

My mare is not just my pet and my partner – She is my everything. How can true love be “wrong?” WWJD? Huh?

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Keep the clause in place and prevent animals from living raped.

Truth Not Politics on December 9, 2011 at 8:58 PM

This may give a new total meaning to the old song

“Wooly Bully” if anyone can decipher the lyrics.

amadan on December 9, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Washington D.C. Where the men are men and the sheep are nervous.

katy the mean old lady on December 9, 2011 at 8:54 PM

GRIN

Dr Evil on December 9, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Horace, some HA members here might not read the sarcasm into that.

listens2glenn on December 9, 2011 at 9:05 PM

I suppose the bitter-clingers and bible-thumpers will display the same heartless opposition to sex with animals as they have to interracial and gay sex. Wow! Such species-centric people!

The government has no business checking into what consenting adults of the same or different phyla do behind closed bedroom or barn doors.

And we will have the same religious facists saying that my horse and I should not be allowed to adopt or attend Penn State. The Westboro Baptist folks will show up shouting “God hates chickens!”

Keep the Government Out of the Doghouses of America!

My mare is not just my pet and my partner – She is my everything. How can true love be “wrong?” WWJD? Huh?

I’m sorry, but, what are you even going on about? Are you honestly suggesting that repealing DADT and the ever increasing support of gay rights will lead to the legalization and promotion of bestiality? That is absurd on many levels. First of all, there is a massive difference between two consenting adults willingly having sex, and an adult having sex with an animal who cannot consent in any way, shape, or form. I’m sorry, but you cannot compare the two. An animal is literally incapable of giving consent, therefore any person who does anything sexual with an animal is essentially raping the animal.

Regardless of whether or not you find the act of two men or women having sex to be disgusting or immoral, the government has no business banning an act between two consenting adults. Lawrence V. Texas settled this almost a decade ago.

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 9:05 PM

canopfor on December 9, 2011 at 8:45 PM
Barney Frank’s favorite commercial…

/

:)

Seven Percent Solution on December 9, 2011 at 8:49 PM

Seven Percent Solution:Lol:)

canopfor on December 9, 2011 at 9:05 PM

I support this.

Even though I may disagree with them Chaz Bono, Rosie ODonnell and Whoopi Goldberg deserve to be loved too.

swamp_yankee on December 9, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Pelosi thinks this will increase her chances of getting a man.

Patrick S on December 9, 2011 at 9:07 PM

Oh Seriously now…..

How do you think the romans kept their war dogs from attacking the wrong infantry???? Gotta build bonds people!

WryTrvllr on December 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM

They should have open registration here more often…./

BigWyo on December 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM

theoddmanout: Speciesist!

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 9:11 PM

Or Alternatively

Drudge (I think) reported on islamist infiltration into the US military. Maybe the plan is to make some swine into Lt. Colonels

WryTrvllr on December 9, 2011 at 9:12 PM

I guess when there’s a language barrier “no” in donkey is just gibberish, allowing for forced insertion to commence. For rape to occur, in the eyes of D.C., both must speak the same language or understand the same wailing and howling.

U.S. Congress, approving of animal rape since… err 2011?

Demosthenes on December 9, 2011 at 9:15 PM

If I remember correctly from a HA article a few years ago…

In Montana, bestiality is legal if you can prove the animal liked it.

Glenn Jericho on December 9, 2011 at 9:16 PM

Could someone be trying to get your goat ?

amadan on December 9, 2011 at 9:16 PM

A nation that repeals bestiality laws cannot expect God to bless them so next time Barack Hussein Obama ends a speech and says, “God bless America.” Know God is saying, “Forget it. Judgment is coming!” This is exposing us to danger.

apacalyps on December 9, 2011 at 9:20 PM

Soldiers to be issued robes.
Because sheep can hear a zipper a mile away.

soundingboard on December 9, 2011 at 9:21 PM

The only thing wrong with sheepses, is ya gotta run ’round front to kiss em.
HeII..everybody kno dat.

Mimzey on December 9, 2011 at 9:22 PM

This may give a new total meaning to the old song

“Wooly Bully” if anyone can decipher the lyrics.

amadan on December 9, 2011 at 9:05 PM

I still rock to that tune on a regular basis. Great song!

OldEnglish on December 9, 2011 at 9:23 PM

The camel’s nose under the tent, so to speak. Start with the military, as always, the socialists’ favorite laboratory. If this, er, spreads to the private sector, I’m going to have some unhappy ranch hands and cattle, for that matter. LOL.

TXUS on December 9, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Up next – necrophilia! Think about it.

OldEnglish on December 9, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Nothing to worry about, the last US cavalry unit ate their horses in the Philippines in 1942. So there are the new mules …

Mu on December 9, 2011 at 9:27 PM

Yeah, maybe they outta leave Art 125 alone.

BKeyser on December 9, 2011 at 9:28 PM

Baaaaaa

glsmith36 on December 9, 2011 at 9:29 PM

The government is one big goat screw so I guess they finally just decided to make it legal and proper.

This is one sick society.

rplat on December 9, 2011 at 9:29 PM

Pelosi thinks this will increase her chances of getting a man.

Patrick S on December 9, 2011 at 9:07 PM

Nah, she always got Newt and the couch.

TXUS on December 9, 2011 at 9:29 PM

Regardless of whether or not you find the act of two men or women having sex to be disgusting or immoral, the government has no business banning an act between two consenting adults. Lawrence V. Texas settled this almost a decade ago.

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 9:05 PM

The military has been in the business of totally governing the private life of consenting adults for, in this country, some 235 years. All you and the leftists who currently govern the military care about is that homosexuality be recognized, approved, and set on an equal footing with heterosexuality. Here, they just goofed and forgot that the bestiality bit is in the same provision as sodomy, an understandable juxtaposition as the two behaviors have been considered equally abhorrent for the last few millennia, or until the advent of Barney Frank.

Don’t worry, they’ll just rewrite the bill to extract and repeal the sodomy part tomorrow. Progress marches on.

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 9:30 PM

Brokeback Nation.

TXUS on December 9, 2011 at 9:32 PM

Mood: Fort Dix deflated by bestiality dogfight; Fort Huachuca responds, “Gesundheit”. News at Eleven.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 9, 2011 at 9:32 PM

Brokeback Nation.

Or this. Or both.

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 9:34 PM

The law of unintended consequences….
Of course, one must first accept that the consequences were unintended.

MaxSplinters on December 9, 2011 at 9:36 PM

Up next – necrophilia! Think about it.

OldEnglish on December 9, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Already here. Dead Democratic voters have been screwing the country for years.

Flora Duh on December 9, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Their is a reason why they are getting rid of bestiality. Homosexuals were being charged under UCMJ for things like… putting a gerbil/mouse up their butt; which would be a unnatural carnal act.

LordJack on December 9, 2011 at 9:40 PM

I mean, what has the world come to if a man can’t lay down with his Brittany Spaniel after a long day of her flushing and you shooting quail. It just ain’t right. ;-)

TXUS on December 9, 2011 at 9:42 PM

Flora Duh on December 9, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Hahaha! Kudos! :)

OldEnglish on December 9, 2011 at 9:43 PM

amadan: “Hattie told Pattie, ’bout a thing she saw. Two big horns. And a wooly jaw.” Words to live by.

BTW – is that hot little goat (or doe or nanny) in the pic accompanying this post wearing anything on her hind legs? “Hey, cutie, wanna feel my oats?”

Both male and female goats have beards. I will go no further with that information.

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 9:46 PM

TXUS: Dang straight!
“Hey, check out that Spaniel over there. Baby got tail!”

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 9:48 PM

This is much to do about nothing. My credentials: I was a 30 year troop and 8 year First Sergeant in the USAF. I know the UCMJ better than most. We received in depth training on the MCM and UCMJ. We used it daily. The only people who know the UCMJ better than First Sergeants are the military judges, JAGs and ADCs. This UCMJ article should have been gone years ago. And there are a few more that should go. For one, this article makes it illegal for a troop to have oral sex with his/her spouse. I also makesit illegal to have anal sex with a spouse. It also prohibits sex with members of the same sex. It also prohibits sex with animals.
So, instead of changing it and leaving the animal part in, they just will delete it. Why not? We have laws in ALL states prohibiting beastiality.
It does NOT allow troops to sex up animals.
There is another article that states “Jumping into the water from a vessel”. Needs to go. Or the one for Dueling. We actually have a LAW in the military against dueling. Needs to go.

tjcat on December 9, 2011 at 9:53 PM

LordJack: They put WHAT in their WHAT?

Good Lord! “Is that a gerbil up your butt or are you just happy to see me?”

I reckon that all of the PC campuses will be posting flyers that say, “Baaaaa!” means “Baaaa!”

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 9:53 PM

who cares?

animals are chattel property, not self aware persons. as long as someone is engaging in deviate sex acts with their OWN animals in ways that dont amount to torture/abuse (and no, sex acts with animals are not per se abusive, there would have to be some physical damage), who cares? It isn’t my business to stand up for the rights of the dog owned by some lady who smears peanut butter over her junk any more than it is my business to stand up for the rights of chickens in a chicken farm who get harvested for meat.

the only crime should be sex acts with animals owned by someone else, because it violates that other PERSON’S property rights.

if beastiality is such a horrible crime against nature, then the people doing it will burn in the afterlife. as long as they arent hurting anybody in the corporeal world, the government has no business getting involved.

kaltes on December 9, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Homosexuals were being charged under UCMJ for things like… putting a gerbil/mouse up their butt

I call BS. Cite one example.

I seriously doubt ANYONE has been prosecuted for UCMJ bestiality in recent history, if ever.

I googled it and nothing came up.

This is probably why the military did not care about keeping bestiality in.

even without a specific prohibition against it, people in the military are subject to very broad discretion where they can be punished for conduct that pisses off their CO regardless of whether it is actually illegal.

kaltes on December 9, 2011 at 9:59 PM

Man Boy Dog Love

If you go on YouTube and search for it, and use the religion of peace in the search, and you will get your love baby!

Kini on December 9, 2011 at 10:00 PM

Or in some cases goat

Kini on December 9, 2011 at 10:00 PM

It involves a long standing statue in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) which states

statute

Schadenfreude on December 9, 2011 at 10:06 PM

who cares?

animals are chattel property, not self aware persons. as long as someone is engaging in deviate sex acts with their OWN animals in ways that dont amount to torture/abuse (and no, sex acts with animals are not per se abusive, there would have to be some physical damage), who cares? It isn’t my business to stand up for the rights of the dog owned by some lady who smears peanut butter over her junk any more than it is my business to stand up for the rights of chickens in a chicken farm who get harvested for meat.

the only crime should be sex acts with animals owned by someone else, because it violates that other PERSON’S property rights.

kaltes on December 9, 2011 at 9:55 PM

You are a walking Jihadist Recruiting Office. Also, substitute “negro slaves” for “animals” in your lovely screed and see how your comment would have sounded 150 years ago.

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 10:12 PM

The military has been in the business of totally governing the private life of consenting adults for, in this country, some 235 years. All you and the leftists who currently govern the military care about is that homosexuality be recognized, approved, and set on an equal footing with heterosexuality. Here, they just goofed and forgot that the bestiality bit is in the same provision as sodomy, an understandable juxtaposition as the two behaviors have been considered equally abhorrent for the last few millennia, or until the advent of Barney Frank.

Don’t worry, they’ll just rewrite the bill to extract and repeal the sodomy part tomorrow. Progress marches on.

So your justification for denying gay people rights, is that they have been denied rights for the past 2,000 years? If so, then do you approve of banning interracial marriage again? How about making slavery legal once more? Or perhaps making it illegal for women to vote again? After all, all of the things I just mentioned were commonplace for most of the past 2,000 years. It has only been in the past couple of centuries that we have legalized interracial marriage, outlawed slavery, and given women the right to vote.

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 10:16 PM

kaltes: “Smears peanut butter on her junk?” Lordy, Lordy!

To a couple of posters above – there are worse things than necrophilia. For instance, “Nancophilia – sex with Nancy Pelosi.”

If that thought and image don’t make you consider a vow of celibacy, nothing will.

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 10:18 PM

So your justification for denying gay people rights, is that they have been denied rights for the past 2,000 years? If so, then do you approve of banning interracial marriage again? How about making slavery legal once more? Or perhaps making it illegal for women to vote again? After all, all of the things I just mentioned were commonplace for most of the past 2,000 years. It has only been in the past couple of centuries that we have legalized interracial marriage, outlawed slavery, and given women the right to vote.

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 10:16 PM

We’re not talking about denying rights. You do not have a right to perform sodomy (or bestiality), in the military or out of it. That’s the first of your fallacious arguments. The rest are standard gay rights historical analogies. They are as empty as the U.S. Treasury, as invalid as a speech by Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 10:26 PM

theoddmanout: What “rights” have homosexuals been “denied” for the past 2.000 years? And why only 2,000 years? Ah yes, the anti-Christianity meme.

Marriage? Not a “right.” And two male homosexuals taking wedding vows does not a “marriage” make.

Otherwise, what “rights” have they been denied? Show me a portion of the Constitution or any state law that denies “rights” to people based upon sexual acts.

Statutes making pedophilia and underage intercourse crimes? Not a “denial” of any “rights.”

The term most used in law is “persons” when referring to rights and privileges, not “straight persons” or “homosexual persons.” The Declaration of Independence does not say that “All heterosexual men are created equal…”

This “rights” nonsense is just a cover for homosexual “marriage” and the benefits that accrue and is meant to push the homosexual agenda.

Are you a slave? Can you vote? Can you marry a person of a different race? Can lesbian homosexuals vote? Your arguments are pure, unadulterated hogwash of the primo variety.

Walmart is having a sale on clues this weekend – check it out.

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 10:30 PM

We’re not talking about denying rights. You do not have a right to perform sodomy (or bestiality), in the military or out of it. That’s the first of your fallacious arguments. The rest are standard gay rights historical analogies. They are as empty as the U.S. Treasury, as invalid as a speech by Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.

I am not talking about the right to have sex within the military. I agree completely that it is not a good idea for soldiers who are in the same platoon to get involved with one another sexually. I am simply talking about legislation that affects ordinary U.S. citizens. An example would be the law that made sodomy illegal in several states before those laws were declared unconstitutional via Lawrence V. Texas

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 10:32 PM

I am not talking about the right to have sex within the military.

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 10:32 PM

We’re discussing changes in the UCMJ, remember? And there is no right to have sex, of any kind, anywhere from sea to shining sea, on and off base.

Enough already.

spiritof61 on December 9, 2011 at 10:37 PM

What “rights” have homosexuals been “denied” for the past 2.000 years?

Well, for most of the past 2,000 years, if you were caught having gay sex, if you admitted to being gay, or if you were suspected of being gay, you were either beaten, put in prison, or killed. In several states sodomy was a crime up until the early 2000′s.

Marriage? Not a “right.” And two male homosexuals taking wedding vows does not a “marriage” make.

The equal protection clause in the 14th amendment states that the government must treat all citizens equally. Allowing straight couples to marry but not gay couples is discrimination. Either the government needs to get out of marriage completely, or it must allow gay people to marry.

Statutes making pedophilia and underage intercourse crimes? Not a “denial” of any “rights.”

I sincerely hope that you are not comparing homosexuality to pedophilia. For if you are, that is a gross display of ignorance.

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 10:40 PM

At Least we won’t be seeing any goats put on diapers and drive to Floria to beat the crap out of some llama

WryTrvllr on December 9, 2011 at 10:40 PM

Obama is disappointed he thought they finally legalized relations between he and Michelle but then his world was shattered when he found out that it applied to the military not him.

bbinfl on December 9, 2011 at 11:05 PM

This is what the separation of church and state will get you. God never intend for livestock to be used like this GRIN.

Dr Evil on December 9, 2011 at 11:11 PM

Well, for most of the past 2,000 years, if you were caught having gay sex, if you admitted to being gay, or if you were suspected of being gay, you were either beaten, put in prison, or killed. In several states sodomy was a crime up until the early 2000′s.

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 10:40 PM

Sounds like you lament being born in the wrong era.

Don’t sweat it…legitimizing and mainstreaming gross immorality always leads to prosperous nations that enjoy peaceful longevity.

tom daschle concerned on December 9, 2011 at 11:14 PM

You were obviously unable to point out even one current state or federal law or one portion in the Constitution that denies rights to anyone based upon perverted sexual acts performed by a person. Unable because there is no such thing. Your dated reference to prior anti-homosexual sodomy laws was below weak.

The government should get completely out of the marriage business. It never should have been involved in the first place. The 14th Amendment is a hodge-podge of questionable propositions put forth by the Radical Republicans during Reconstruction and will become irrelevant to the homosexual agenda once the government gets out of marriage – no state action or action under color of state law.

Facts showing evidence of homosexual pedophilia displays “ignorance?” When homosexuals run out of facts, they resort to personal attacks. I’m sure I am much more educated than you and that I am not ignorant. Also – before you get to it, I am not “homophobic.” I do not fear homosexuals, which is what the term means. I think their perverted acts are intrinsically disordered and I find them (the acts, not the misguided souls who commit them) to be far beneath disgusting. However, I also feel sorry for them (the disordered persons) as they are slaves to their obsessions.

And facts? Well over 90% of the pedophilia in the Catholic Church is male on male. ALL of the alleged victims of Sandusky at Penn State were young males. Homosexuals cannot reproduce, so conversion of young males to their acts is the only way to propagate them. And, no, I do not believe that homosexuality is genetic. The is zero, nada, zip scientific proof for that proposition.

Do I think homosexuals should be mistreated? No. Do I think homosexuals should be denied rights? No. But, keep in mind that there is a huge chasm between “rights” and “wants” or “desires” mislabeled as rights. Do I think homosexuality is both morally and aesthetically wrong? Yes.

Do I think religious organizations can hold and teach this without attacks, e.g. Mormons in California attacked and slandered by homosexuals after the Proposition passed?
Yes.

Sorry you took the trouble to knock on the door and present your spiel, but you won’t be making any sale here. Better move on down the road with a shoeshine and a smile. (If you were well-read and literate, you would “get” that reference.)

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 11:15 PM

Just reading the title of this post sickens me at what has happened to what was once considered the greatest country on earth.

Flora Duh on December 9, 2011 at 8:47 PM

The same thing that happened to the GREEK then the ROMAN empires

tomyj1

tomyj1 on December 9, 2011 at 11:16 PM

Sorry you took the trouble to knock on the door and present your spiel, but you won’t be making any sale here. Better move on down the road with a shoeshine and a smile. (If you were well-read and literate, you would “get” that reference.)

Horace on December 9, 2011 at 11:15 PM

Yeah…like he said.

The world is already becoming more like what you described, and if we don’t keep our fertility rates up, expect the same treatment here. You’re not helping…

WryTrvllr on December 9, 2011 at 11:19 PM

Dude, wtf? I mean really, wtf?

hawkdriver on December 9, 2011 at 11:24 PM

Sorry you took the trouble to knock on the door and present your spiel, but you won’t be making any sale here. Better move on down the road with a shoeshine and a smile. (If you were well-read and literate, you would “get” that reference.)

You are indeed correct in your assertion. When conversing with someone such as yourself who says things like this:

Homosexuals cannot reproduce, so conversion of young males to their acts is the only way to propagate them.

It would be incredibly foolish of me to think that I would be able to sway you in any way, shape, or form. Even more foolish of me to try. But, as the saying goes, ignorance is bliss.

theoddmanout on December 9, 2011 at 11:30 PM

It sex between humans and animals doesn’t work then please explain Henry Waxman.

kurtzz3 on December 9, 2011 at 11:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2