Why some states still call gays criminals

[The Philosopher]

From 365gay.com

Laws do more than establish legal rules. Consider:

The Kansas House Judiciary Committee is debating a bill intended to clean up the state’s criminal code. An amendment to that bill would have done away with the law that bans consensual homosexual sex. But two Kansas Republicans –Jan Pauls and Lance Kinzer – removed that amendment from the law. The ban is unenforceable in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lawrence v. Texas, so why did they do it?

...

There can be only two reasons. The first is that the Supreme Court could, in theory, reverse itself and reestablish the right of states to enact laws criminalizing intimate sexual conduct between members of the same sex. This is never going to happen, though.

This brings me to the real reason: By keeping this law on the books, the lawmakers (and, by extension, the state) send the message that, as far as they’re concerned, those who engage in such conduct are still criminals, even if they can’t be punished. And for many, to call homosexuals criminals is an important vindication of their view that we are sinners.

http://www.365gay.com/opinion/culhane-why-some-states-still-call-gays-criminals">Click Here To Read More

[hfojvt]

1. Jan Pauls is a Democrat

http://www.kshousedems.com/page/jan-pauls-biography

Although some in the Progressive caucus want to kick her out of the party.


And as a side note "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" Romans 3: 23

We are all sinners, in the eyes of the fundies. Their opinion on that is not gonna change even if the law does.

[RKP5637]

2. It's a backward state IMO. And Brownback wonders why people are leaving KS to

move to other states even though higher unemployment. Some just want to get out of KS, period. Just look at some of the crap that goes on in KS, who can blame anyone for moving, this is just yet one more example.

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. And for many, to call homosexuals criminals is an important vindication of their view

view that we are sinners.

There is the crux of it - their inability to separate church from state.

A sin is a moral judgment, based on religious text.

A crime is a civil judgment based on civil and criminal laws.

Often, they overlap. More often, they don't.

Heresy may be a sin, but it is not a crime - not yet.

Smoking pot may be a crime, but it is not a sin - it is mentioned nowhere in the Bible. OTOH, drinking to intoxication is a sin, but it is not a crime unless the drinker causes problems.

Theocrats want every sin to also be a crime, and every crime to be a sin.

[RKP5637]

4. And they even want the feet off your avator. n/t

[xchrom]

5. recommend

[fishwax]

6. k/r

:kick:

[Ratty]

7. Never going to happen?

I would never have thought a Supreme Court could elect a president or declare corporations are people.

[RKP5637]

9. In the future these might seem like the best of days. Countries go south, we are no

exception.

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. Kinzer is a Republican, but Pauls is a Democrat:

http://www.ksdp.org/node/5222