Alabama AG to ban Sodomy

[Moonglow]

Only a mentally ill person would put their penis in someone's pooper. And vice versa, only a severely disturbed person would take it up the pooper.

The penalty for this is AIDS. When will degenerates learn?

I had several encounters in the rear with ladies, yet no AIDS, did I do something wrong? It was like riding a bucking bronco...yeah-ha!

 

[PoliticalTorch]

Someone should tell him that includes getting a blow job from your secretary.

Alabama Attorney General Wants Court To Reinstate Sodomy Ban | Right Wing Watch

Three days after a state appeals court struck down Alabama’s ban on consensual oral and anal sex, the state’s Republican attorney general, Luther Strange, is asking the court to reconsider its decision.

Hasn't he heard of Lawrence vs. Texas and the fact the U.S. Supreme Court removed such draconian laws from all 50 states?

 

[koshergrl]

We might selectively enforce them against muslims too.

"We"?

Well assume that's who you are accusing of selectively enforcing...the non homo christian folk you hate so much.

Unless you think that progressive queers are selectively targeting progressive queers..which they probably do, but in a different way...

 

[Moonglow]

We might selectively enforce them against muslims too.

"We"?

Well assume that's who you are accusing of selectively enforcing...the non homo christian folk you hate so much.

Unless you think that progressive queers are selectively targeting progressive queers..which they probably do, but in a different way...

With a gaydar pocket alert system..

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

Only a mentally ill person would put their penis in someone's pooper. And vice versa, only a severely disturbed person would take it up the pooper.

The penalty for this is AIDS. When will degenerates learn?

I had several encounters in the rear with ladies, yet no AIDS, did I do something wrong? It was like riding a bucking bronco...yeah-ha!

With "ladies", lol.

I know, your like Magic Johnson, you only have the HIV.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Aren't Conservatives concerned about the size and scope of government? Don't they want the government to get out of their personal lives? I suppose they do want to shrink government. Right down to the size of a typical bedroom.

I for one, as a registered Republican (and what most would consider conservative on many issues) would like to see the size of government reduced.

My solution to the problem (which tends to piss off both the left and the right) is to:

1. Recognize all Civil Marriages between law abiding, Tax Paying, consenting, adult couples wishing to establish a next-of-kin relationship where one did not exist before.

2. Repeal Public Accommodation laws as applied to private businesses so that they can exercise their rights of property and association as they see fit. If they don't want to serve blacks (or Asians or Mexicans) they don't have to. If they don't want to serve Musims (or Christians or Jews) they don't have to. If they want to serve only men that is their choice. If they don't want to serve homosexuals, that is there choice. Public Accommodation laws should only apply to government entities and restrict their ability to contract goods and services since those are paid for with taxpayer dollars.​

That reduces the size and scope of government. Government treats citizens equally and private entities get to make their own choices about relationships and business dealings.



>>>>

 

[ClosedCaption]

Only a mentally ill person would put their penis in someone's pooper. And vice versa, only a severely disturbed person would take it up the pooper.

The penalty for this is AIDS. When will degenerates learn?

I had several encounters in the rear with ladies, yet no AIDS, did I do something wrong? It was like riding a bucking bronco...yeah-ha!

I, too, have plunged into the chocolate starfish of a few bitches. Where's my AIDS?

 

[DGS49]

Let's see...where to start...

The title of the thread is either a lie or based on profound stupidity. The appeal concerns non-sonsensual conduct and the AG freely admitted in his brief that a ban on consensual sodomy would be unconstitutional (under the current reading of the Constitution).

Anything coming out of a website called anything like "rightwing watch" is suspect to start with.

Readers of the Kama Sutra will be surprised to learn that banning sodomy would confine sex practices to the "missionary position."

Obviously, most of the people posting on this thread didn't even take 30 seconds to read the ******* link.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

Only a mentally ill person would put their penis in someone's pooper. And vice versa, only a severely disturbed person would take it up the pooper.

The penalty for this is AIDS. When will degenerates learn?

I had several encounters in the rear with ladies, yet no AIDS, did I do something wrong? It was like riding a bucking bronco...yeah-ha!

I, too, have plunged into the chocolate starfish of a few bitches. Where's my AIDS?

Bullshit you are an involuntary celibate.

 

[Nosmo King]

Aren't Conservatives concerned about the size and scope of government? Don't they want the government to get out of their personal lives? I suppose they do want to shrink government. Right down to the size of a typical bedroom.

I for one, as a registered Republican (and what most would consider conservative on many issues) would like to see the size of government reduced.

My solution to the problem (which tends to piss off both the left and the right) is to:

1. Recognize all Civil Marriages between law abiding, Tax Paying, consenting, adult couples wishing to establish a next-of-kin relationship where one did not exist before.

2. Repeal Public Accommodation laws as applied to private businesses so that they can exercise their rights of property and association as they see fit. If they don't want to serve blacks (or Asians or Mexicans) they don't have to. If they don't want to serve Musims (or Christians or Jews) they don't have to. If they want to serve only men that is their choice. If they don't want to serve homosexuals, that is there choice. Public Accommodation laws should only apply to government entities and restrict their ability to contract goods and services since those are paid for with taxpayer dollars.​

That reduces the size and scope of government. Government treats citizens equally and private entities get to make their own choices about relationships and business dealings.



>>>>

I don't believe that creating 2nd class citizen by repeal of Public Accommodation laws is right at all. If you want to see "Whites Only" signs spring up or "No Homosexuals are Welcome in this business", abolish Public Accommodation. That is not an assurance of the promotion of the general welfare, nor an assurance of domestic tranquility. It is, in fact, cover for discrimination, bigotry and hate, none of which lines up with American ideals in the 21st century.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Aren't Conservatives concerned about the size and scope of government? Don't they want the government to get out of their personal lives? I suppose they do want to shrink government. Right down to the size of a typical bedroom.

I for one, as a registered Republican (and what most would consider conservative on many issues) would like to see the size of government reduced.

My solution to the problem (which tends to piss off both the left and the right) is to:

1. Recognize all Civil Marriages between law abiding, Tax Paying, consenting, adult couples wishing to establish a next-of-kin relationship where one did not exist before.

2. Repeal Public Accommodation laws as applied to private businesses so that they can exercise their rights of property and association as they see fit. If they don't want to serve blacks (or Asians or Mexicans) they don't have to. If they don't want to serve Musims (or Christians or Jews) they don't have to. If they want to serve only men that is their choice. If they don't want to serve homosexuals, that is there choice. Public Accommodation laws should only apply to government entities and restrict their ability to contract goods and services since those are paid for with taxpayer dollars.​

That reduces the size and scope of government. Government treats citizens equally and private entities get to make their own choices about relationships and business dealings.



>>>>

I don't believe that creating 2nd class citizen by repeal of Public Accommodation laws is right at all. If you want to see "Whites Only" signs spring up or "No Homosexuals are Welcome in this business", abolish Public Accommodation. That is not an assurance of the promotion of the general welfare, nor an assurance of domestic tranquility. It is, in fact, cover for discrimination, bigotry and hate, none of which lines up with American ideals in the 21st century.

It may not line up with big government authoritarian ideals of the 21st century. But the the two suggestions together line up very well with the idea of individualism, personal choice, let the market place function**, individual liberty, personal freedom, and get the government out of making personal decisions for the individual.



** Society has changed in the last 60 years and changed a lot. There has been a "corporatisation" where you can't spit without finding a company gas station, movie theater, restaurateur, motel/hotel, etc. Just because we repeal Public Accommodation laws, doesn't mean that things are going to go back to the way they were 3 generations ago. And there are a number of factors that impact this:

1. We are much more mobile society. People routinely travel in a manner unprecedented then both temporary and "permanent" relocation's out of the area they grew up in.

2. We are more informed society and information is much more available today about how a business conducts it self in term so taking care of customers we have Criag's list, Angie's list, Yelp, and a plethora of hotel, restaurant, and review sites for any type of business and it's not just the discriminated against who would choose not to associate with such a business. It includes many in the majority that would shy away from such businesses.

3. The "corporatisation" of businesses in America watches the bottom line and having your "brand name" associated with and appearing to condone discrimination has a negative impact on the bottom line. With corporate owned "shops" and franchises who still fall under policies of the home office means that these businesses will not allow or condone what was going on prior to the 60's.​

>>>>

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Only a mentally ill person would put their penis in someone's pooper. And vice versa, only a severely disturbed person would take it up the pooper.

The penalty for this is AIDS. When will degenerates learn?

I had several encounters in the rear with ladies, yet no AIDS, did I do something wrong? It was like riding a bucking bronco...yeah-ha!

So did you have the ladies use a big black strap-on, or something a bit more your size ?

 

[ClosedCaption]

I had several encounters in the rear with ladies, yet no AIDS, did I do something wrong? It was like riding a bucking bronco...yeah-ha!

I, too, have plunged into the chocolate starfish of a few bitches. Where's my AIDS?

Bullshit you are an involuntary celibate.

Put down the mirror and talk to me now

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

I, too, have plunged into the chocolate starfish of a few bitches. Where's my AIDS?

Bullshit you are an involuntary celibate.

Put down the mirror and talk to me now

Can't, unfortunately you broke the mirror.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Bullshit you are an involuntary celibate.

Put down the mirror and talk to me now

Can't, unfortunately you broke the mirror.

So you cant put it down?

Great response there Mr Rooney

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

Put down the mirror and talk to me now

Can't, unfortunately you broke the mirror.

So you cant put it down?

Great response there Mr Rooney

How do I hold a mirror you broke Einstein? I don't want to get cut by glass shards. and pick up your AIDS.

 

[g5000]

Only a mentally ill person would put their penis in someone's pooper. And vice versa, only a severely disturbed person would take it up the pooper.

The penalty for this is AIDS. When will degenerates learn?

I had several encounters in the rear with ladies, yet no AIDS, did I do something wrong? It was like riding a bucking bronco...yeah-ha!

I, too, have plunged into the chocolate starfish of a few bitches. Where's my AIDS?

Same here, and I, too, am AIDS free. We three have clearly been doing it wrong.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Aren't Conservatives concerned about the size and scope of government? Don't they want the government to get out of their personal lives? I suppose they do want to shrink government. Right down to the size of a typical bedroom.

Only when it comes to science, infrastructure and investment in science. Taliban, like, you bet!

 

[Peach]

>

Personally I don't have a problem with forcible oral or anal sex being included under rape and typical child molestation statutes in the same way the non-consensual penal/vaginal sex is considered rape

Instead of trying to appeal a bad law which could possibily attempt to be applied to consenting adults, maybe - just maybe - the AG ought to petition the legislature to rewrite the rape laws to give prosecutors the power he seeks under non-consensual sex laws (i.e. rape).



>>>>

In most states, I believe sexual BATTERY means just that, any battery that is sexual in origin.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Same here, and I, too, am AIDS free. We three have clearly been doing it wrong.

I had a girl in college say, "lets do it in the butt". I didn't have any lube so she said, "isn't there lube on the condom?" and I fucked her in the ass with a condom. She is a married woman now very happy with children and I got to **** a chick in the ass. We all won.

No aids for me either! And I don't think god cared what we did that night. Was he really watching? ******* creep. Perv. Why did he make her ass feel sooo good if he didn't want me to **** it? He should have given women an extra row of teeth if he didn't want them giving us oral either.

The thread is like reading the comments on shit-house walls.

Different strokes for different folks.

Hetero, homo, between consenting adults - nobody's business.

People really do need to stop peeking in windows and just mind their own business.