Posted on 09/18/2010 12:10:48 PM PDT by presidio9
At a time when gays have been gaining victories across the country, the Republican Party in Montana still wants to make homosexuality illegal.
The party adopted an official platform in June that keeps a long-held position in support of making homosexual acts illegal, a policy adopted after the Montana Supreme Court struck down such laws in 1997.
The fact that it's still the official party policy more than 12 years later, despite a tidal shift in public attitudes since then and the party's own pledge of support for individual freedoms, has exasperated some GOP members.
"I looked at that and said, 'You've got to be kidding me,'" state Sen. John Brueggeman, R-Polson, said last week. "Should it get taken out? Absolutely. Does anybody think we should be arresting homosexual people? If you take that stand, you really probably shouldn't be in the Republican Party."
Gay rights have been rapidly advancing nationwide since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Texas' sodomy law in 2003's Lawrence v. Texas decision. Gay marriage is now allowed in five states and Washington, D.C., a federal court recently ruled the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy unconstitutional, and even a conservative tea party group in Montana ousted its president over an anti-gay exchange in Facebook.
But going against the grain is the Montana GOP statement, which falls under the "Crime" section of the GOP platform. It states: "We support the clear will of the people of Montana expressed by legislation to keep homosexual acts illegal."
Montana GOP executive director Bowen Greenwood said that has been the position of the party since the state Supreme Court struck down state laws criminalizing homosexuality in
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
It is about public sodomy and promotion of sodomy.
Well, I think it depends upon what you mean by private. Suppose you and your children live in an apartment in Butte and several nights each week your next door neighbor (an interior decorator) goes out, picks up and brings home a different cowboy, and your children are forced to listen to the sounds of their perverted activities next door. Then, the next morning, as your children are leaving for school, they have to confront these different people.
Do you consider that private or would you agree to consider prosectution in such a case?
Yes, they should just leave the platform as it always has been. The way to alienate conservatives is to have the GOP push the homosexual agenda.
So it's no PDAs allowed, is that it? You're not outlawing homosexuality, just public affection for fags. That seems at odds with what the Montana GOP is advocating. They seem to want to outlaw the whole shooting match, so to speak.
Sorry! I was away from the comp for a while and didn’t see you had pinged it out already.
‘S’okay, a fairly busy discussion anyway.
“This site does not support the homosexual agenda”
That is why I love this site. There are so few standing up for traditional values. Even so called conservatives like Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Greg Gutfield and Charles Krauthammer have bought into the homosexual agenda.
This site helps me keep my sanity.
Kids live in a world trying to make the soulless.
DJ, my lovely dear FRiend, I so hope that you are right.
I would never live in an apartment.
It would revert to what it was before 1997. That would mean no homosexual behavior in public. Find a case where they broke down a door and arrested someone for it before 97.
It doesn’t matter. It drew attention to a lively thread. That’s what counts. Discussion.
And he was wrong. Influenced by leftist homosexual agenda.
Just like you.
I do believe you know exactly what I mean. If you choose to go on a tangent, so be it.
What kid would admit shock in our current society? They won’t. They’ll listen in “class” and behave as if they knew about fisting etc all along. Meanwhile they’ll get the inner, creepy willies.
I know, I know - you wouldn't be a district attorney.
See, the problem is with the word "private" in the context of activity that creates a public danger even when conducted behind closed doors. Homosexual conduct is perversion and a public danger no matter where it is conducted.
Your public/private distinction is meaningless and only serves to promote perversion.
Homosexual sodomy is an abominable crime against nature, that SHOULD be criminalized. It is one of the most vile and damaging crimes that can be committed against society.
They were in all states for most of this country's history and it never crossed anyones' mind that it was unconstituitonal.
Keeps the perversion out of public life and away from children. The influence of homosexual agenda pushers is huge right now but the tide is turning. They've overplay their hand, as the mentally ill are wont to do.
No, the law said that all homosexual relations were deviate sexual conduct and were punishable by a $50,000 fine and 10 years in prison. It didn't say anything about public behavior vs. private behavior.
Find a case where they broke down a door and arrested someone for it before 97.
Nobody was ever charged under the law for public behavior or private behavior. But don't let that stop you. Let's imagine you had the power to write the new law. What specifically would you prohibit?
I? Promoting perversion?
If two or more homosexuals are creating a nuisance with noise and numerous overnight or hourly buggering partners, then yes, legally they should be culpable.
Homosexuality used to be considered a mental illness, sodomy was a crime, and society frowned on such practitioners. They had to hide their actions and stay in the closet. The pendulum is swinging back to that position. THen, those who want to practice such unnatural sex acts, will have to do so in extreme privacy. Where no one can know what they are up to, and they cannot promote such acts as normal or natural, especially to young people.
I admit that I don't. I always thought being conservative meant wanting less government, not more. And fewer intrusions, not more. I'm curious how a conservative law limiting or banning actions between adults would look like. I'm hoping that you can educate me. What exactly would you criminalize?
Good, and wouldn’t you also be willing to consider prosecuting the interior decorator if he publicly confessed that he had picked up local cowboys and engaged in homosexual activities with them in places offering what you call extreme privacy?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.