ACLU says bathroom sexcapades are none of the gov's damn business!!!!

[old_tony]

Tony.
Try harder.

Smoking and privacy have nothing to do with one another.

Why not? It certainly is a private decision to smoke. Unless you think others make that decision for the smoker.

Apparently, those among us who are determined to keep their heads stuck in the 1950s haven't heard about the health effects of second-hand smoke yet.

First off, second-hand smoke dangers are way overblown.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100318,00.html

But that aside, how does sex in a public place rate a private act?

 

[I love puppies!]

Tony.
Try harder.

Smoking and privacy have nothing to do with one another.

Why not? It certainly is a private decision to smoke. Unless you think others make that decision for the smoker.

Apparently, those among us who are determined to keep their heads stuck in the 1950s haven't heard about the health effects of second-hand smoke yet.

First off, second-hand smoke dangers are way overblown.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100318,00.html

But that aside, how does sex in a public place rate a private act?

I assume this goes for people who need a bit of self "release" during layovers. Just keep the door closed and explain that the grunting is the result of a hard to digest Biscoff.

 

[JR]

First off, second-hand smoke dangers are way overblown.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100318,00.html

[/quote]

Jesus, you're entering Sillyland now.

This is right up there with "The Myth of Global Warming", "Evolution: Just a Theory" and "Wal_Mart: The Worker's Friend.

Besides, smoking and sex have nothing to do with each other except for afterwards.

 

[outofplace]

Tony.
Try harder.

Smoking and privacy have nothing to do with one another.

Why not? It certainly is a private decision to smoke. Unless you think others make that decision for the smoker.

Apparently, those among us who are determined to keep their heads stuck in the 1950s haven't heard about the health effects of second-hand smoke yet.

That's a silly argument. Smokers in 2008 know the effects of smoking. They choose to smoke.

Try reading a little closer. I'm not talking about the effects on the smokers, but the people around them. And OT, that article shows nothing. It shows one situation in which people used an unscientific method of study. That article is a lot of innuendo with very little fact to back up its attack on the research into the effects of second-hand smoke.

And it also talks only about heart disease, as if that were the only effect of cigarette smoke. If you're going to make a ridiculous statement like that, at least find some better backup.

 

[hondo]

It's crude, degenerate behavior for people of any sexual preference to commit sex acts in a public bathroom.

What about parking garages, airplane washrooms and public parks and beaches?

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Have a little self-respect and common decency and take it private, no matter who you are or who you want to have sex with.

 

[JR]

First off, second-hand smoke dangers are way overblown.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100318,00.html

Jesus, you're entering Sillyland now.

This is right up there with "The Myth of Global Warming", "Evolution: Just a Theory" and "Wal_Mart: The Worker's Friend.

Besides, smoking and sex have nothing to do with each other except for afterwards.
[/quote]

 

[hondo]

Tony.
Try harder.

Smoking and privacy have nothing to do with one another.

Why not? It certainly is a private decision to smoke. Unless you think others make that decision for the smoker.

Apparently, those among us who are determined to keep their heads stuck in the 1950s haven't heard about the health effects of second-hand smoke yet.

That's a silly argument. Smokers in 2008 know the effects of smoking. They choose to smoke.

Try reading a little closer. I'm not talking about the effects on the smokers, but the people around them. And OT, that article shows nothing. It shows one situation in which people used an unscientific method of study. That article is a lot of innuendo with very little fact to back up its attack on the research into the effects of second-hand smoke.

And it also talks only about heart disease, as if that were the only effect of cigarette smoke. If you're going to make a ridiculous statement like that, at least find some better backup.

on this subject, how about this: your cigarette smoke is foul and chokes the breath out of my lungs. I don't give a **** what study proves what about second-hand smoke. It's noxious.

 

[JR]

It's crude, degenerate behavior for people of any sexual preference to commit sex acts in a public bathroom.

What about parking garages, airplane washrooms and public parks and beaches?

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Have a little self-respect and common decency and take it private, no matter who you are or who you want to have sex with.

Hondo's punishment for odd sex:

 

[cranberry]

It's crude, degenerate behavior for people of any sexual preference to commit sex acts in a public bathroom.

What about parking garages, airplane washrooms and public parks and beaches?

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Have a little self-respect and common decency and take it private, no matter who you are or who you want to have sex with.

Jesus, Hondo, didn't you ever get a little drunk at country club party and try to get a little action out by the 14th green?

 

[JR]

It's crude, degenerate behavior for people of any sexual preference to commit sex acts in a public bathroom.

What about parking garages, airplane washrooms and public parks and beaches?

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Have a little self-respect and common decency and take it private, no matter who you are or who you want to have sex with.

Jesus, Hondo, didn't you ever get a little drunk at country club party and try to get a little action out by the 14th green?

Hondo saved his outdoor golf sex for the caddyshack.

 

[outofplace]

Tony.
Try harder.

Smoking and privacy have nothing to do with one another.

Why not? It certainly is a private decision to smoke. Unless you think others make that decision for the smoker.

Apparently, those among us who are determined to keep their heads stuck in the 1950s haven't heard about the health effects of second-hand smoke yet.

That's a silly argument. Smokers in 2008 know the effects of smoking. They choose to smoke.

Try reading a little closer. I'm not talking about the effects on the smokers, but the people around them. And OT, that article shows nothing. It shows one situation in which people used an unscientific method of study. That article is a lot of innuendo with very little fact to back up its attack on the research into the effects of second-hand smoke.

And it also talks only about heart disease, as if that were the only effect of cigarette smoke. If you're going to make a ridiculous statement like that, at least find some better backup.

on this subject, how about this: your cigarette smoke is foul and chokes the breath out of my lungs. I don't give a **** what study proves what about second-hand smoke. It's noxious.

Like that ever works with a smoker.

 

[Captain_Kirk]

It's crude, degenerate behavior for people of any sexual preference to commit sex acts in a public bathroom.

What about parking garages, airplane washrooms and public parks and beaches?

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Have a little self-respect and common decency and take it private, no matter who you are or who you want to have sex with.

Jesus, Hondo, didn't you ever get a little drunk at country club party and try to get a little action out by the 14th green?

Golf course sex rates way up there. Just be sure to remember your etiquette and wave the foursomes behind you through so as not to delay play.

And I though the whole intent of having beaches was to have sex. Why do you think we're already half naked when we're on them anyway?

 

[Lester Bangs]

I think there has to be somebody at the ACLU who is turning out these memos if , for no other reason, than that they know every time they do Larry Craig goes deeper into the closet. The last thing this windbag wants is his name associated with the ACLU.

 

[Yawn]

First off, second-hand smoke dangers are way overblown.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100318,00.html

Jesus, you're entering Sillyland now.

This is right up there with "The Myth of Global Warming", "Evolution: Just a Theory" and "Wal_Mart: The Worker's Friend.

Besides, smoking and sex have nothing to do with each other except for afterwards.

[/quote]

Second-hand smoke isn't any worse than some of the **** their putting in foods. And yet, my God, the age expectancy is rising in spite of both!

 

[Ace]

Preservatives and pilates.

 

[outofplace]

First off, second-hand smoke dangers are way overblown.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100318,00.html

Jesus, you're entering Sillyland now.

This is right up there with "The Myth of Global Warming", "Evolution: Just a Theory" and "Wal_Mart: The Worker's Friend.

Besides, smoking and sex have nothing to do with each other except for afterwards.

Second-hand smoke isn't any worse than some of the **** their putting in foods. And yet, my God, the age expectancy is rising in spite of both!


[/quote]

Damn, Yawn...that's weak even by your standards.

First of all, there is no such thing as second-hand fat. My eating habits do not damage the health of the people around me the way second-hand smoke does.

And the ongoing increase in life expectancy has a hell of a lot more to do with improvements in medical sciene than anything.

Oh, I forgot. You don't believe in that science stuff, do you?

 

[SigR]

The fetus has rights? How about a zygote?
Survey says, "No."
AS to the other, here's the position, FWIW.

http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14523res20020304.html

[Digression On]

I agree with you, but suggest this: Don't be so callous about it. It is, after all, a potential human being you are talking about.

That's what makes me angry when I defend "choice" in the abortion debate--seeing liberals dance with their friends talking about how great it is to abort babies. Not that I actually see it, but their rhetoric often produces that imagery.

Abortion is profoundly immoral, but there are two sets of rights at play--the *actual* rights of the mother and the *potential* rights of the fetus. It basically becomes a choice between the lesser of two evils, the greater evil being government interfering with the right of an actual person to do what she wants with her body, no matter how immoral that action might be.

[/Off]

 

[Beaker]

The fetus has rights? How about a zygote?
Survey says, "No."
AS to the other, here's the position, FWIW.

http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14523res20020304.html

[Digression On]

I agree with you, but suggest this: Don't be so callous about it. It is, after all, a potential human being you are talking about.

That's what makes me angry when I defend "choice" in the abortion debate--seeing liberals dance with their friends talking about how great it is to abort babies. Not that I actually see it, but their rhetoric often produces that imagery.

Abortion is profoundly immoral, but there are two sets of rights at play--the *actual* rights of the mother and the *potential* rights of the fetus. It basically becomes a choice between the lesser of two evils, the greater evil being government interfering with the right of an actual person to do what she wants with her body, no matter how immoral that action might be.

[/Off]

Umm, I don't think anyone cheers about abortion, even those of us who believe that a woman should have a right to choose. I'd love to live in a world without abortion, but it just isn't possible.

 

[Smallpotatoes]

Rush Limbaugh enlisted the ACLU to help defend him against doctor-shopping in Florida.
It's what the ACLU does, contrary to its many wingnut opponents.
I wish AP had cited/quoted the "Minnesota Supreme Court decision" to which it efers. That must be some interesting legalizin'.

Everyone's head the expression "A conservative is a liberal who's been mugged."
Well, I guess in some cases a liberal is a conservative who's been arrested.

 

[Bill Horton]

There isn't a bit of intellectual dishonesty regarding abortion. The ACLU supports a woman's right to choose as confirmed by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade, and it supports the right to privacy, established in Griswold v. Connecticut, on which that right is based.. As to other civil liberties issues contingent to the subject, the ACLU has fought for, among other things, the right of anti-choice protestors to march in front of clinics and against expanded "buffer zones." To wit:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/05/17/a_move_to_expand_buffers_at_clinics/

As to guns, the ACLU has taken an admittedly nuanced position based on the only available Supreme Court decisions -- there aren't many -- and on the available scholarship and on the Second Amendment's own inherent ambivalence. It supports the right of the state to regulate and register the commerce in firearms, but it has not, as far as I know, ever argued that an individual does not have a right to bear arms.

It's too bad the unborn child doesn't have a choice over whether or not it dies.