Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
User Journal

damn_registrars's Journal: Why are these not all banned, then? 17

Journal by damn_registrars
Someone recently tried to make a point by stating

You cannot make a child through sodomy

Which appears to be yet another flimsy excuse for supporting homophobia. But if we really want to run with that flimsy statement, then we should realize that if that is really the only concern then there are many other sexual acts that have the same outcome:

  • Sex with a post-menopausal woman
  • Sex with a man who has had a vasectomy
  • Sex with a woman who has had her tubes tied or a hysterectomy
  • Sex with anyone who has had gender reassignment surgery

Furthermore, sex with a pregnant woman cannot produce another baby beyond the one already in the womb.

So why are all of those acts not banned as well? Why don't we support hatred against people who participate in them>

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why are these not all banned, then?

Comments Filter:
  • You really cannot procreate via sodomy. I'm not sure how you find this undeniable fact an object of fear any more than, say, sunrise.
    • You really cannot procreate via sodomy.

      And I gave you a list of several other methods by which you cannot procreate. So why do you obsess over only the one? And why don't you encourage hatred, fear, or oppresion of heterosexual couples who engage in the other methods?

  • When drawing blood and getting covered in fecal matter is involved, I think it's not to be thought of as just "an alternative".

    But that's me.

    • When drawing blood and getting covered in fecal matter is involved, I think it's not to be thought of as just "an alternative".

      Have you ever had sex with a woman during her period? That often involves blood. I'm not aware of any place or organization that has tried to ban that activity. Granted, it doesn't involve fecal matter, but it does involve blood and generally is not productive if the goal is to conceive.

      And if you have two partners where neither has a vagina, it isn't really much of an alternative when the traditional route is physiologically unavailable.

      • by gmhowell (26755)

        While I don't know that anyone has tried to pass secular laws regarding heterosexual intercourse while the woman is menstruating, it's very clearly not allowed by all of the Abrahamic religions.

        Which I suppose brings it back to your point (that I don't think you made terribly well in your journal post): why do certain people pick and choose which religious laws they want enforced with secular authority?

        • Which I suppose brings it back to your point (that I don't think you made terribly well in your journal post)

          It seems that my writing does not always come across clearly, particularly here on slashdot. I know I could go back and edit the JE to try to change that but I don't expect that anyone else is likely to come across this JE spontaneously at this point so a changed version would likely not attract any new eyes.

          why do certain people pick and choose which religious laws they want enforced with secular authority?

          That is getting close to the point. I would argue, however, that they aren't particularly interested in enforcing religious laws (some of which are actually rather ambiguous as to whom they actually

          • by mcgrew (92797) *

            however, that they aren't particularly interested in enforcing religious laws (some of which are actually rather ambiguous as to whom they actually apply to) so much as they are seeking someone to force their own particular brand or morality on.

            You hit the nail on the head. What people seem to not understand is that judging people goes directly contrary to Christ's teachings, as is hating anyone for what they are or what they do - hatred itself is forbidden in Christianity.

            Try telling some Christians that,

            • by gmhowell (26755)

              I suspect it is more 'brand' than 'morality'. Let's face it, there are a whole pile of people who just want to be able to exercise authority over others. Whether the justification is moral, legal, religious, or something else matters not one whit.

  • Many who oppose homosexual behavior also oppose some of the items on your list, especially vasectomies and tubal ligation. Does the gender reassignment surgery really even need to be addressed in regards to this?

    In fact, the only one of interest that you mentioned was intercourse with post-menopausal with. IIRC, this is usually explained as being more or less a gift to the couple for being in a union. There's a bit more to it, but you have to accept the postulation that marriage is a joining of man and woma

    • Many who oppose homosexual behavior also oppose some of the items on your list, especially vasectomies and tubal ligation. Does the gender reassignment surgery really even need to be addressed in regards to this?

      Actually the one I probably should have added to the list is oral sex. Many heterosexual couples engage in that for various reasons and it has a procreation rate of essentially 0.

      In fact, the only one of interest that you mentioned was intercourse with post-menopausal with. IIRC, this is usually explained as being more or less a gift to the couple for being in a union

      What kind of gift is that? If it is only acceptable to have sex to create children, then clearly sex with a post-menopausal woman should be banned under that logic. In fact, shouldn't men be required to divorce their wives after their last period by the same reasoning? Why do they get a free pass here?

      There's a bit more to it, but you have to accept the postulation that marriage is a joining of man and woman under God.

      I wasn't really discuss

      • by gmhowell (26755)

        I'll certainly agree that a large portion of those who are against homosexual acts quickly turn a blind eye to their behaviors that are forbidden by the same text.

        And any Christian who tells you that sex is only for procreation is bad at reading and comprehension. The primary purpose of sex is offspring. A bonus, and the reason that God made it enjoyable, is one of His gifts to humans for engaging in marriage. But Christians who can neither read nor comprehend is another item that is so facially obvious tha

    • by mcgrew (92797) *

      In fact, the only one of interest that you mentioned was intercourse with post-menopausal with.

      That was a really weak argument on his part. How old was Sarah when Isaac was born? In her nineties, wasn't she?

      • In fact, the only one of interest that you mentioned was intercourse with post-menopausal with.

        That was a really weak argument on his part.

        You don't have to see my argument as strong, weak, or even valid. The point I'm after is that I see it as hypocritical (at best) that of all the different sexual acts that are incapable of creating children, there are just a short list of ones that certain people get their underwear all up in a bunch over and want to throw people in jail (or worse) for partaking in. Even more so, these are the same people that claim to want the government "out of the way" or to "leave them alone", yet here they are askin

        • by mcgrew (92797) *

          The point I'm after is that I see it as hypocritical (at best) that of all the different sexual acts that are incapable of creating children

          I'm not going to argue with that, I agree completely. However, I do remember a news report several years ago about a woman in her late sixties having a kid. Biology takes strange turns sometimes.

          there are just a short list of ones that certain people get their underwear all up in a bunch over and want to throw people in jail (or worse) for partaking in. Even more so, th

  • Give them time, I'm sure they'll get around to it eventually.

    • Give them time, I'm sure they'll get around to it eventually.

      I don't think so. I expect that the conservatives will apply their usual strategy of moral relativism and come up with a way to warrant hating homosexual couples even when they are doing something of the same ends or methods as what heterosexual couples do.

      • by unitron (5733)

        You underestimate the tendency of religion to freak out about all kinds of sex, and, when given the power of the state, to decide that "something must be done".

The tree of research must from time to time be refreshed with the blood of bean counters. -- Alan Kay

Working...