On Sep 25, 2007, at 11:48 AM, ravi wrote:
> I cannot claim to peer in Ahmedinejad's brain, but I think Michael
> Smith's point about acts being considered illegal (not existential
> states or attributes) is relevant -- one could read him as stating
> that Iran[ians] does not subscribe to that particular form of
> classification [of sexual identity], and what they have laws against
> are acts such as X (e.g: X = sodomy, whether practised by someone who
> identifies himself as gay or merely as a Republican). Of course, such
> laws are unjust.
What western country has laws against "being gay," whatever that means? Or has ever had? Even the Catholic Church sorta accepts nonpracticing homos.
Doug