In Response to Violet (and Becka):
To be a homosexual, in a legalistic sense, you must be a person who engages in sex with persons of your same gender. Thinking about it merely makes you imaginative. Of course, this is mainly a semantic argument. Perhaps the piece should have more properly subtitled "Come July, the United States might finally make active homosexuality legal." That doesn't make the fact that many state laws are straight out of the dark ages less offensive.
Addendum to Violet: My vocabulary and debating skills don't make me smarter, they just indicate that I know more words and how to phrase them. It is a practiced art, not an accident. Ergo it is something that one should be able to learn, should one choose, rather than an accident of fate. Simply put: I'm not smarter, I'm just well read.
In Response to Andrew:
Thank you for looking that up. I didn't realize that most of the people reading this were unaware of how many states have sodomy in the books as a crime. Unfortunately, your list is incomplete (you didn't include Texas, for one, and that's what the original article was about. Try http://www.sodomylaws.org/ for better info. And hey, your coordinates were pretty moderate, pal. I'm curious as to what you agreed/disagree on.
I'm tempted to put out a statement of belief now, to see what people disagree with me on. The problem is, most of you will tend to agree with me without argument because I'm scary (to quote another) in an argument. So perhaps it might be good to see where everyone stands on important issues confronting this country. So, my first question is - what's the burr under your saddle? Are there one or two issues that determine how you vote? Do you have any strong feelings on something? Or do you just passively appreciate the political situation and pick the candidate who "feels" right?
Matthew Carroll-Schmidt at 10:28 PM