For a minute, I thought you were talking about smoking :-)
Or maybe driving.
Once the hazard was known, steps can be and were taken to mitigate the hazard. You should limit your case to those who have died since the ramifications (no pun intended) of the activity have been known who were not participants and did not choose to accept the risk created by others. That number is quite small and comparable to many risks of life to bystanders.
Many things are detrimental to families that are not illegal and are far more prevalent: football widowhood, ordinary adultery, boy’s night out etc. And then there is simple laziness, bad temperament, inability to communicate etc. The fact is, you cannot perfect humanity by passing laws. That has been religion’s greatest mistake since first achieving power under Constantine. Christ denied His kingdom was of this world or that perfection or something like it was achievable by fiat. But it doesn’t stop many people who call themselves Christians from trying over and over and ultimately becoming their own enemy in the process.
>Once the hazard was known, steps can be and were taken to mitigate the hazard.<
Your responses continue to show a real commitment to minimizing the homosexual movement and its effect, and when playing football is implicated in the death of millions in 40 years, because they but the gas pump in the exhaust pipe of the team bus, and such forms a special PAC which advocates multitude positions which are contrary to conservatism, then post back. till then give it up or change.
> The fact is, you cannot perfect humanity by passing laws. That has been religion’s greatest mistake since first achieving power under Constantine<
More sophistry. No, laws themselves do not perfect humanity, and i certainly did not posit they do. But laws rightly require a moral standard for man, unless you like banks who are exempt, and restrains those who do not want to do what it right. The RCC was wrong in taking upon the sword of men, (2Cor. 10:4-6) as that prerogative is given to Caesar, (1Pt. 2:13-14) but that is not what Christians are seeking to do, and an animosity against Christians trying to contend for righteousness by words and votes mean means favoring a contrary ideology.
The old liberal canard: "You can't legislate morality."
No, but it beats the hell out of legislating immorality.
And you can legislate moral behaviour.
That has been religion’s greatest mistake since first achieving power under Constantine. Christ denied His kingdom was of this world or that perfection or something like it was achievable by fiat.
By that token, then, we should stop working to redeem the world -- "You are the salt of the earth. But what good is salt if it has lost its flavor? Can you make it salty again? It will be thrown out and trampled underfoot."
And I guess that means Wilberforce should not have worked to abolish the slave trade by peaceable means.
Or The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (a Republican, btw), should not have fought for civil rights against Dems of the like of Al Gore's father.
But it doesn’t stop many people who call themselves Christians from trying over and over and ultimately becoming their own enemy in the process.
That isn't what's happening here...
Cheers!