Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Virginia Attorney General Petitions To Uphold Anti-Sodomy Law

Virginia Politics Anti-Sodomy laws 2013

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:25 PM

The age of consent is an issue for me here, not the act of sodomy.  I looked it up, and there is a lot of conflicting data on Virginia's age of consent.  Adult is defined at 18, but there's something on the books about sexual activity at 15 that is legal.  I'm assuming the prosecutor would have charged  McDonald with sex with a minor if it applied.

​In any event, I wish lawmakers would stay out of people's bedrooms.  It gets kind of creepy after a while.  All this peeking into the bedroom is just plain ol creepy.  Leave people alone for crying out loud.  Some people [both gay and straight] like anal sex.  Get over it.

http://www.huffingto..._n_3007731.html

Quote


WASHINGTON -- Virginia Attorney General and gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli has filed a petition challenging a ruling that recently struck down the state's anti-sodomy law.
The petition, filed on March 26 but reported by the Washington Blade on Wednesday, asks for a full 15-judge court to reconsider a decision made on March 12 by a three-judge panel that overturned the law.
[...]

Unlike the legality of that issue, which is currently before the Supreme Court, anti-sodomy laws have been considered unconstitutional for nearly a decade under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. In the 2003 decision Lawrence v. Texas, the court struck down a Texas statute that prohibited sexual acts between same-sex partners and implied that similar laws did not pass constitutional muster. However, the Virginia law has since remained on the books. [...]
In 2005, William Scott McDonald, then 47, was convicted under the "Crimes Against Nature" law for soliciting a 17-year-old girl to commit sodomy.


A three-judge panel ruled that the statute was unconstitutional based on the Lawrence decision. The court invalidated the conviction, noting that an unconstitutional law could not be used to convict McDonald.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#2 Nikcara

Nikcara

    confused little imp

  • Islander
  • 3,500 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 04:19 PM

Out of curiosity, I looked up the age of consent laws in Virginia.  They appear to set the age at 18, while people close in age have more lenient laws, so an 17 year old with a 16 year old would receive a lighter punishment than an 80 year old with a 17 year old.  However once you turn 18 you can't have sex with anyone younger than 18, so even an 18 year old with a 17 year old would be in trouble.  So a 47 year old guy would still get in legal trouble for sex with a 17 year old.  

What appears to be at stake is that there is a law that makes it so that sodomy with a minor results in a harsher punishment than normal sex.  Oddly enough, it appears that any sex that is not vaginal/penile is classified as "a crime against nature" and therefore results in a harsher punishment...which means that oral sex would get you in more trouble than vaginal.  While it is a misdemeanor to have sex with a teen between the ages of 15-17, it's a felony to have other types of sex with them.  

There's actually a chance that the 'crimes against nature' thing will hold up in court (according to the internet at least).  The premise is that the courts can't interfere with what two consenting adults do, but if one of the participants isn't legally an adult the courts can dole out different punishments for different sex acts.  That in an of itself I don't inherently disagree with (I'd need to think about it more before I came to a strong conclusion), but trying to make this particular guy a felon is asinine.
We have fourty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse  -- Rudyard Kipling

Develop compassion for your enemies, that is genuine compassion.  Limited compassion cannot produce this altruism.  -- H. H. the Dalai Lama

#3 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 04:48 PM

I couldn't make head nor tails out of the Virginia age of consent laws, so thanks for clearing that up.  

My one problem with this [as I understand it now], is the crime should be the sex with a minor who ostensibly cannot give consent, cannot form a contract, etc.  I'm not sure I agree with aggravating the crime by enumerating sexual acts.  It treads on a razor thin line in my opinion.  

If it was rape, then it is a felony.  It's the line between rape and statutory rape that should be the determining factor, not a certain  kind of sex.  If he was guilty of statutory rape, then so be it.  If he brutally raped her anally, then that should be the determination.  Stating that statutory rape is more horrendous if it is anal sex or oral sex, is well, silly.  We're talking statutory rape, which means one participant is under age, but gave consent.  It's the statute that makes it a crime, not the man forcing himself on her.  If a minor doesn't give consent [regardless of how meaningless that consent is under the law], then it is rape.  In the case of rape one could argue that anal sex was more destructive on a case by case basis depending on the injuries of a rape victim.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#4 Nikcara

Nikcara

    confused little imp

  • Islander
  • 3,500 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 06:13 PM

The injuries part is pretty much the only reason why I'm not inherently against giving different punishments for different acts of rape, but then again I could also be easily swayed to thinking simply making the injuries themselves evidence of a more brutal crime and therefore altering the punishment.  I suppose one could argue that anal sex is has a higher chance of spreading STDs, but that could be largely obviated by the use of condoms.  Besides, using that logic, oral should be a lesser crime than vaginal, since that (generally) has less of a transmission rate.  And unless they're going to start altering punishments based on whether or not the perpetrator used protection, it seems irrelevant what type of sex was had.

I'm not entirely convinced we need laws to make one set of sex acts 'more rapey' than another, but then again we do have different laws for different types of sexual imposition already.  Gross sexual imposition is a different crime than forcible rape which is different from statutory rape, and I agree with these different definitions.  There are probably more types of charges a DA can bring against a person, all of which would probably be simply considered either 'rape' or 'really pervy' outside of a courtroom.  This does raise the question for me - if there is a situation where a man raped an adult woman, would he get a harsher punishment for anally raping her, or the same as vaginal rape?  If the punishment there would be different, it would be easier to defend the idea that different sex acts get different punishments when one party is legally unable to give consent.  I suspect the answer to that varies from state to state.  I know different states have slightly different legal definitions of rape.
We have fourty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse  -- Rudyard Kipling

Develop compassion for your enemies, that is genuine compassion.  Limited compassion cannot produce this altruism.  -- H. H. the Dalai Lama

#5 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 06:41 PM

The sodomy provisions in all Crimes Against Nature (CAN) laws were theoretically struck down by Lawrence v Texas, but a number of (mostly Southern) states refused to scrub them from the books.  As far as I know, and I may be wrong, there are two reasons they get away with it.  

1. CAN laws are never actually enforced.  Local cops and DAs use CAN laws to coerce gay people caught engaging in public sex - bathroom or park sex -  to plead out.  They get away with it because the stigma of possibly being made to register as a sex offender (as anyone convicted of CAN would be forced to do) is a powerful inducement to plead guilty to lesser charges (e.g., indecent exposure).  

And 2. Because the anti-sodomy law at the heart of Lawrence criminalized only homosexual sodomy.  The hetero component of the law had been repealed by Texas a few years before the men were arrested for having sex in their apartment.  As the article points out, while the Lawrence ruling strongly hints that all anti-sodomy laws are unconstitutional, the specific law SCOTUS invalidated covered ONLY homosexual sodomy while explicitly legalizing the same acts when done by heterosexuals.  So the states have a tiny little bit of wiggle room to keep CAN laws on the books - and there they will remain as long as no one actually has the cojones to risk everything and go to trial - because even if the state won at trial, a guilty verdict would surely be reversed on appeal and result in an explicit appellate court ruling that all sodomy laws are unconstitutional.  

So they remain as a law enforcement tool to oppress gay people.  That's the bottom line.

Edited by BklnScott, 03 April 2013 - 06:48 PM.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#6 Nikcara

Nikcara

    confused little imp

  • Islander
  • 3,500 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 07:02 PM

And Scott just convinced me that they're bad laws that should be done away with.
We have fourty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse  -- Rudyard Kipling

Develop compassion for your enemies, that is genuine compassion.  Limited compassion cannot produce this altruism.  -- H. H. the Dalai Lama

#7 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 08:10 PM

Quote

Some people [both gay and straight] like anal sex.  Get over it.

Yeah, but at least the straight couple can blame the crime on poor aim. "She insisted we keep the lights off Officer..." :unsure:

Personally I can't stand it when cops come rappelling through my bedroom window to check which "port" I'm planning on docking in. I get that they're just doing their job...but it's a real mood killer. :(
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#8 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 09:44 PM

 scherzo, on 03 April 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

Quote

Some people [both gay and straight] like anal sex.  Get over it.

Yeah, but at least the straight couple can blame the crime on poor aim. "She insisted we keep the lights off Officer..." :unsure:

Personally I can't stand it when cops come rappelling through my bedroom window to check which "port" I'm planning on docking in. I get that they're just doing their job...but it's a real mood killer. :(

LOL, OK, that was funny.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#9 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 04 April 2013 - 07:29 AM

 scherzo, on 03 April 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

Quote

Some people [both gay and straight] like anal sex.  Get over it.

Yeah, but at least the straight couple can blame the crime on poor aim. "She insisted we keep the lights off Officer..." :unsure:

Personally I can't stand it when cops come rappelling through my bedroom window to check which "port" I'm planning on docking in. I get that they're just doing their job...but it's a real mood killer. :(

*snerk*   :lol:
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#10 Kota

Kota
  • Islander
  • 417 posts

Posted 04 April 2013 - 09:27 AM

 scherzo, on 03 April 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

Quote

Some people [both gay and straight] like anal sex.  Get over it.

Yeah, but at least the straight couple can blame the crime on poor aim. "She insisted we keep the lights off Officer..." :unsure:

Personally I can't stand it when cops come rappelling through my bedroom window to check which "port" I'm planning on docking in. I get that they're just doing their job...but it's a real mood killer. :(


Bravo... :clap:

#11 DarthMarley

DarthMarley
  • Islander
  • 1,292 posts

Posted 04 April 2013 - 10:58 AM

A problem with the sex offender registry laws is that misdemeanors such as indecent exposure or public urination do put many people on that list, IMO unfairly.

My FB comment about this matter was "I bet he thinks girl on girl action is hot though."
"It is not who is right, but what is right that is of importance."

#12 Mikoto

Mikoto

    Rejected on all levels.

  • Islander
  • 9,304 posts

Posted 04 April 2013 - 07:42 PM

 scherzo, on 03 April 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

Quote

Some people [both gay and straight] like anal sex.  Get over it.

Yeah, but at least the straight couple can blame the crime on poor aim. "She insisted we keep the lights off Officer..." :unsure:

Personally I can't stand it when cops come rappelling through my bedroom window to check which "port" I'm planning on docking in. I get that they're just doing their job...but it's a real mood killer. :(

*Chuckle.*
Rejected and gone.

#13 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 05 April 2013 - 12:13 AM

Somebody needs to wake and look around, because we're in the 21s century now. And I think we know which somebody I mean.:p

And ROTFLMAO at LotS!!!
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#14 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 10:50 AM

http://www.huffingto..._n_3051758.html


For now, I suppose this is a dead story...




Quote


WASHINGTON -- A court has denied Virginia Attorney General and 2013 gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli a full hearing to challenge a ruling that struck down the state's anti-sodomy statute as unconstitutional.

The court issued a short, two-sentence statement on Monday denying the petition, filed on March 26, for an en banc hearing. The court noted that no judge requested the full hearing in front of 15 judges, after a three-judge panel ruled the statute unconstitutional on March 12.

The decision is a blow for the attorney general, a steadfast social conservative who is running in an increasingly liberal state.




Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Virginia, Politics, Anti-Sodomy laws, 2013

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users