substitute: (lamers)
[personal profile] substitute
http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/docket/2002/march.html#02-102

Grab a pot of coffee and Acrobat reader and have yourself a big bowl of sexual politics. The Amicus Curiae response in favor of the Texas sodomy law are some fine reading, brought to me courtesy the Psychoceramics mailing list.

Personally I'm not interested in having any sodomy in Texas or elsewhere, so it's academic for me. But I'm fascinated by the loopy reasoning some people have for wanting to prohibit it by law.

(no subject)

Date: 2003-03-26 11:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jwz.livejournal.com
In case it changes your answer, I was under the impression that the legal definition of "sodomy" also includes heterosexual oral sex. (But I haven't read the legal documents, because lawyers do not make me hot.)

(no subject)

Date: 2003-03-26 11:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] substitute.livejournal.com
Well, I'm not getting much of that either ;) I think I'm far more opposed to Texas than to sodomy by any definition of sodomy, anyway.

Some of those documents get really, really wacky.

That's a rather tender subject...another slice?

Date: 2003-03-27 12:47 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] brianenigma.livejournal.com
I heard them chatting about this on NPR the other morning (you can probably find the audio on their website if you are interested). They (conservative Texans) are trying to lump homosexual sex (a victimless quote-unquote-crime) in with evil sex crimes (rape, incest, etc.) While privacy in the bedroom is a right, privacy during such evil sex crimes is not. They are just trying to decide on what exactly "evil sex crimes" includes. I am not much of a lawyer, either--I am getting good at the syntax of dockets, but not yet the semantics--but since [livejournal.com profile] meta_kate is a budding lawyerette, she may be able to shed some light on all this.

According to an online version of Black's, sodomy is any "unnatural" sex act, including man/man, woman/woman, and human/animal. It says nothing about oral sex, but I could see how a conservative court might rule it as a crime against nature. Does lumping together gay sex with beastiality strike anyone else as too broad a definition?!

---standard boilerplate...blah, blah, my own opinions, blah, blah, not a professional, blah, blah, closed course professional driver, blah, blah...
From: [identity profile] srl.livejournal.com
Many states in the US have sodomy laws: see www.sodomylaws.org for the details there, but they tend to cover oral and/or anal intercourse, regardless of the gender of the participants. 4 states (Texas is one of them) have sodomy laws that make only same-sex activities crimes.

Profile

substitute: (Default)
substitute

May 2009

S M T W T F S
      1 2
3 456 78 9
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags