11/5    So the Texas Republican Party has a plank that calls for the
        criminalization of homosexuality. Now that they have both
        houses of the legislature and the Governorship, how long before
        they start rounding up all the gays and lesbians? Right now
        the Supreme Court will stop them, but how long is that going
        to last, with GWB getting two or maybe even three or four
        appointments in the Clarence Thomas mold? Sure, once they
        start doing this, gays will leave Texas en masse, since
        being an out gay in the Texas Penal System is tantamount
        to a death sentence, but how long after their success
        in Texas will it take for them to try and replicate
        this nationwide? -gay sodan
        \_ Well, the amazing thing about our two party system is that
           those bastards from Texas and these guys actually share a party:
           http://www.logcabin.org/logcabin/home.html
           The question is: are the neandrathals from the gulf coast of
           texas more powerful, or are guys like the above more powerful?
           I'm guessing that the ones who actually produce something useful
           in our economy and can read will come out on top.
        \_ Actually, I believe that certain states still contain buggery
           and sodomy statutes. During the founding of this country
           virtually all the colonies had bugger and sodomy statutes so
           in a sense this is criminilazation of homosexual practices, but
           just a re-affirmation on what's in the books. There's actually
           a rather interesting discussion on Locke v. Rose in which
           the court is trying to graple whether or not cunnilingus is
           actual sodomy.... Anyway, the point is that you need to pro-actively
           pursue changing the laws instead of assuming it's the GOP's fault
           that homosexual activities are illegal. I would assume that
           would come in the form of either a state statute or a challenge
           of the existing laws' constitutionality. However, stare
           decisis has it that homosexual activity isn't exactly protected
           by the constitution. Probably there needs to be enough momentum
           in the electorate to change this type of attitude, which I doubt
           you will find in Texas. Take home message, don't live in Texas if
           you're openly gay. -williamc
        \_ Am I missing something?  This is the Texas GOP's platform, according
           to them:
           http://www.texasgop.org/library/platform.php
           The only thing they say about gay issues is
           "We believe that traditional marriage is a legal and moral
            commitment between a natural man and a natural woman."
           I'm a supporter of gay marriage, and I dislike the GOP for all sorts
           of reasons, but opposition to gay marriage is also the position of
           Kerry and most other democratic politicians.
           \_ Download the entire platform:
              Homosexuality: The Party believes that the practice of sodomy
              tears at the fabric of society, contributes to the
              breakdown of the family unit, and leads to the spread of
              dangerous, communicable diseases. Homosexual behavior is
              contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have
              been ordained by God, recognized by our country.s founders,
              and shared by the majority of Texans. Homosexuality must
              not be presented as an acceptable .alternative. lifestyle in our
              public education and policy, nor should .family. be redefined
              to include homosexual .couples..
              Texas Sodomy Statutes: The Party opposes the legalization of
              sodomy. The Party demands Congress exercise its authority
              granted by the U.S. Constitution to withhold jurisdiction
              from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy.
              \_ This is not "criminalization".  This is advocating keeping it
                 illegal.  Minor semantic detail, same difference.  -John
              \_ Wow.  Ok, never mind.
                 \- this is in part why the oconnor dissent was interesting
                    in the lawrence case.
        \_ The party platform often bears little to no resemblance to reality.
           Planks are put in the platform to support special interest groups
           within the party, but it's clear to all observers that those planks
           are not nor will ever be action items for the party.
           \_ That's true.  However, Texas did ban gay civil unions, right?

[ you have bitch. ]