Welcome to you. You have arrived at a plain text page in the 
          LoveAllPeople.org network of web pages. To visit our regular HTML
          web pages, please copy the link below, and paste it into your
          Internet Explorer or other browser. Blessings to you. - Rev. Bill McGinnis
  
     Link to copy => http://www.loveallpeople.org/chapellinks.html
   
      

       CLINTON USED THE DICTIONARY DEFINITION OF "SEXUAL RELATIONS"

   
   These days it seems that a correct understanding of the term "sexual
   relations" is more important than ever, given the political situation
   with President Clinton.
   
   So out of curiosity, I decided to look it up in my regular, on-my-desk
   dictionary, the "Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary." There it
   is, right on page 1079:

        "sexual relations n pl (1950): COITUS"

   And coitus is defined as "physical union of male and female genitalia
   accompanied by rhythmic movements usually leading to the ejaculation
   of semen from the penis into the female reproductive tract; also
   INTERCOURSE." (page 258)
   
   This is not "legal hair-splitting;" it is the normal, everyday human
   understanding of the concept. The good old Anglo-Saxon word for it is
   "fucking." "Having sex" means "having sexual intercourse." Everything
   else is "fooling around." When I was a teenager, we called it
   "petting." And "petting to orgasm" was the favorite way we got our
   sexual satisfaction while preserving our virginity and not getting
   pregnant before we were married and before birth-control pills were
   invented.
   
   What Bill and Monica did was "fooling around," or "petting." (Oral
   sex, plus other sex play.) It was not "sexual relations." They never
   did have sexual relations, according to both of their testimonies.
   Thus they never did have a "sexual relationship," because to have a
   "sexual relationship," you must first have "sexual relations," which
   they never had. It is possible to have lots of sexual excitement and
   orgasm in a relationship, but it is not a "sexual relationship" unless
   it involves "sexual relations," which means "intercourse." Ask any
   teenager. They know the difference. When Bill Clinton was a teenager,
   I guarantee you that HE knew the difference! I bet he explained that
   difference to a hundred different girls, none of whom ever got
   pregnant.
   
   Precise definitions are very important, particularly in law, where
   life and death may depend on a definition. "Murder" may get you the
   death penalty, but "manslaughter" will not. Yet both are killing, and
   what is the difference? The difference is that if you commit murder,
   you may be executed, but if you commit manslaughter, you cannot be
   executed. (The actual legal difference is "malice aforethought.")
   Similarly, the difference between "sexual relations" and anything else
   is "intercourse."
   
   In the Bible, "adultery" could get you stoned to death. So it was very
   important to have a precise definition of "adultery." If you kiss
   somebody else's wife, is that adultery? No. What if she is highly
   responsive and has a climax from the kiss alone (some women do, you
   know). Does the climax make it adultery? No. Now, what if you fondle
   her breasts. Is that adultery? No. What if you massage her vagina, or
   she massages your penis. Is that adultery? No, but it's getting close.
   In order to have adultery, you must have intercourse. Once again from
   the same dictionary, page 58, under "adultery:"


    "ADULTERY can be applied only to sexual intercourse between a
     married person and a partner other than his or her wife or
     husband;"


   Once again, "intercourse" is the key concept. Without intercourse, you
   can have neither "sexual relations" nor "adultery." So Bill and Monica
   did not have a "sexual relationship" nor did they have an "adulterous
   relationship." What they had was some extreme sexual "fooling around,"
   or "petting."
   
   And why didn't Bill Clinton have sexual relations with Monica
   Lewinsky, when she wanted it? So he could truthfully say, if ever he
   were asked, "No. I never had sexual relations with that woman."


     Yours for accurate use of language,

          Bill McGinnis
          bmcgin@patriot.net