What I said was that homosexual acts are an example of sodomy, but that the term encompasses a lot more besides. In the AMERICAN legal tradition, the term sodomy meant a range of non-reproductive sex acts between two people of the same sex or between people of the opposite sex.
The content of the sodomy laws varied between different states (I think the ones in Texas were amended in the 1970s to exclude acts by married couples), but the purpose of the law was the same. It was an expression of communal morality and a reminder to people that sex should be about procreation.
Interestingly, at times the sodomy laws were used against heterosexual men who were accused - but acquitted - of rape. On the assumption that there is no smoke without fire, and following feminist pressure, the accusing woman was asked whether oral sex had taken place. If the answer was yes, and even if the act was consensual, the man was then charged with sodomy.
It’s true that homosexuals were pushing for the repeal of such laws (obviously homosexual sodomy is more common than heterosexual sodomy), but sodomy and homosexuality are different things.
Whether such laws should be brought back is a complicated matter. Whether we like it or not, sex of every conceivable description is now well and truly “out of the closet”, and that would put the police in a difficult position. Either they try to enforce the law properly, in which case they would have to question millions of people, or the law is left unenforced, in which case the law would be brought into disrepute.
On balance, I believe reintroducing sodomy laws (and anti-fornication and anti-adultery laws) is not a good idea at this time. In a different time and place, one may come to a different conclusion. As they say, politics is the art of the possible.
Read the definition.. sodomy = homosexuality..
This issue isn’t about “private consensual adult behaviour” its the Trojan horse method of attack by homosexual activists and advocacy groups and their perverse effort to legally legitimize the behavior of homosexuality in the courts and by legislation. Should homosexual marriage be legalized then by judicial fiat homosexuality would be legitimized across the board. This means that school children, by law would be taught that homosexual behavior is a “safe” and “normal” alternative “sexual lifestyle choice” and by law parents will have no grounds to object (regardless of the negative spiritual, moral, psychological, biological, and medical consequences) IOW unconditional approval and acceptance of perversion, kowtow to the sodomites or else.
I’ll ask again, are you a Texan?