Canada has WMDs

[--Pete]

Hi,

First, the definitions that are listed in dictionaries are changeable. They are modified over time as the editors include newly acceptable definitions for words.

I believe I said, "Remember that dictionary definitions aren't necessarily up to date on usage" which is in agreement with your statement.

Second, my real point is that the dictionary definition is irrelevant. If you are going to consider the ramifications of sodomy in a relationship from a legal standpoint, you need to consider the legal definition of the term in the jurisdiction involved.

Again, quoting from my post, "Remember that dictionary definitions . . . often don't have technical or jargon usage right". Again, no argument.

Thank you for giving examples of both my points, however, that does not change the basic intent of my post, which was to point out that the simple concept of "sodomy" as "anal intercourse" is both limited and ignorant.

And, yes, I agree with your further conclusions as to the ideal role of the government in this case. But you probably knew that, since I've often made my viewpoint on what should be legislated amply clear. :)

--Pete