1. You don't have to say "gay sex." It's just "sex," which you later say was just kissing so even that's not correct. 2. Police in Baton Rouge did the same shit while I was living there about 10 years ago. thetaskforce.org/news/louisia... Wtf, @apnews.com
did they catch Charlie Kirk and Josh Hawley again??
What a world
shame on you @apnews.com
In that case women have gay sex too, is that illegal?
They never write, heterosexual sex
Do you know of any laws against heterosexual sex? The law is against gay sex.
My point is that sex is sex. On bigots would write, "gay sex"
*Only
Yes, I understand your failed point. Despite your desires a reporter has to write gay sex if the law is against gay sex and not against sex. Consider pulling the stick out of your ass.
Also to the beloved George Michael in 1998. Never changes.
Meanwhile, we have a credibly accused child rapist in the Oval Office who "Christians" swoon over like he's the second coming of Jesus. 🙄
"Religious Police" - two words that should not be linked in this way. Neither is good on its own, together they are terrifying. Especially when you understand that they don't follow a written set of laws, but make arrests based on feelz.
.... that is ALL police
tell me they don’t know what sex is without telling me they’ve never had any
Duh, if it was hetero, there would be no story.
Note to gay people: stop having gay sex. Just have sex. 💡 I mean, that's what you were doing, right? How else can they legally define it? 🤔
From the same disgusting group of right-wingers who regularly try to sneak bills through their state legislatures to legalize child brides.
In Indonesia?
The AP article that was linked to was about events inside the US.
You didn't read it.
I mispoke on the AP part. I meant the link above the AP screenshot, which absolutely references the US.
Is the law controversial because it will arrest men? Or is there something else? Some other quality that the article just has to mention because it clarifies the reality for the reader. That's what reporters do.