Acai Optimum

Just as the TVA 'competed' with private energy generators and suppliers with the full force and backing of the Federal government behind it, the Congressman makes the point that the public plan option has all the advantages over private insureres due to the simple facts that the government option never needs to make a profit or be held accountable to shareholders. A government monopoly can and will always outlast private insurers, regardless of whether not it supplies better coverage.

Whenever I see another article calling President Obama the "New FDR," I wonder if those authors now how right they are.

(Note - the Sons of Liberty Blog, and all Sons of Liberty, do not advocate, condone, or otherwise endorse in any way the use of illegal substances to celebrate winning the Mr. Olympia bodybuilding competition.)

CIA operates a highly classfied and potentionally dangerous operation for eight years - no one knows about it (except for the dead terrorists, I assume)

The CIA briefs Congress in June - by July everyone in the world knows.

Why, again, should this secret spy agency tell Congress anything that they want KEPT secret?

Let's look at the definition of homosexuality as given us by Dictionary.com:

sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex

Because homosexuality is, in part, defined as behavior towards a person of one's own sex, your statement that, "The issue of choice as it relates to sexual expression is irrelevant in both understanding homosexuality and in policy discussions regarding homosexual civil rights and liberties" is incorrect. You've effectively ommitted half of the term's very definition. Our behaviors are goverened by choice. This statement cannot be denied. If you could explain to me how behavior is not ultimately determined by choice, I'd be happy to listen, but I believe no such explanation exists. We may have strong impulses to engage in certain behaviors, but at the end of the day we choose to deny or indulge those impulses.

Finally, the first part of the definition says that 'sexual desire' is also an inherent part of homosexuality. I agree with that, in fact I make mention of that in my post at the beginning of the 4th paragraph "While it is true that...". I think it could be fairly stated that my entire post is based on the assumption that we have certain genetic predilections...I just don't end the conversation there.

The attraction definition is much more nebulous than the behavioral definition. For instance, it may well be true that there are many virgin homosexuals and heterosexuals out there. But to me, that seems a bit like saying, "I'm a huge choc-o-holic, but I've never eaten a bite of the stuff." Now I can't deny that the person who says this may have an involuntary salivary response whenever he sees someone else bite into a hershey bar, but I can say that the statement rings a bit hollow. And as for the gay rights movement, I would wager that the vast majority of activists are those who actively choose to engage in homosexual behavior.

Conversely, what about the male high school wrestler, who during the course of a match finds himself aroused because of the intense physical contact with his opponent. Is he homosexual in that instance or heterosexual? What about the woman who experiments in college with same sex activity, but then is exclusively heterosexual after graduation and beyond. Where does her homosexuality stop and where does it start? What about the boy who is sexually abused by his step father, and then finds himself attracted to men in adolescence and adulthood. Is his homosexual attraction entirely genetic, or is it case of nurture rather than nature? What about the Spartan soldier who was born with a genetic proclivity towards female attraction, but who came to be aroused by men because of the homosexual structure of Spartan military society? How would we classify the origin of his homosexual attraction? I'm not saying that your defenition of homosexuality isn't correct, I'm just saying, inherently, it cannot be neatly applied, and we would do well to acknowledge that.

"Homosexuality is an entirely victimless activity practiced by consenting adults."

In your summation, there is no such thing as a virgin homosexual (although presumably heterosexuals can be virgins) because it is the act of homosexual sex which defines one as a homosexual. Someone may identify as a bisexual, while only choosing to have sex with men, but that does not mean that they do not have bisexual desires, thoughts, fantasies, etc. Likewise, someone may engage in homosexual sex, but identify completely as a heterosexual (in fact, the porn industry has made millions off of the presumption that women enjoy sex with one another, but are not actually homosexuals). Sex and sexuality are entirely separate issues.

The issue of choice as it relates to sexual expression is irrelevant in both understanding homosexuality and in policy discussions regarding homosexual civil rights and liberties. Nevertheless, I agree that conservatives do have a lot to gain from a less divisive and exclusive mentality regarding all aspects of sexuality, sexual expression, gender identity and gender expression.