I think what my daughter's trying to say is: nyah nyah nyah nyah.

Joyce ,'Same Time, Same Place'


Natter 31 But Looks 29  

Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.


Dana - Dec 29, 2004 8:55:26 am PST #1240 of 10002
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.

It was illegal until a few years ago in Texas. The case that struck down the anti-sodomy law was big news.


Topic!Cindy - Dec 29, 2004 8:56:30 am PST #1241 of 10002
What is even happening?

tries not to ask ita if she's planning a vacation


Fred Pete - Dec 29, 2004 8:57:47 am PST #1242 of 10002
Ann, that's a ferret.

There are states where anal sex is illegal, right? How can I find out which ones?

ita, about a year and a half ago, the U.S. Supreme Court found that anti-sodomy laws, regardless of the genders of the practitioners, are unconstitutional as applied to what consenting adults do in private.

Yes, there's a constitutional right to have sex.

(ETA: Xpost, of course.)


Frankenbuddha - Dec 29, 2004 8:58:41 am PST #1243 of 10002
"We are the Goon Squad and we're coming to town...Beep! Beep!" - David Bowie, "Fashion"

The recent Supreme Court ruling declared all such laws unconstitutional, if I'm not mistaken.

Also, wasn't oral sex included under the rubric "sodomy"?


Kate P. - Dec 29, 2004 8:59:04 am PST #1244 of 10002
That's the pain / That cuts a straight line down through the heart / We call it love

ita, my understanding of the legal definition of sodomy was yours (gender irrelevant), but I've seen it used most commonly in reference to gay male sex (as in the somewhat antiquated epithet "sodomite").


§ ita § - Dec 29, 2004 9:00:02 am PST #1245 of 10002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

The recent Supreme Court ruling declared all such laws unconstitutional, if I'm not mistaken.

Huh. I google and ...

Of the 13 states with sodomy laws, four -- Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma and Missouri -- prohibit oral and anal sex between same-sex couples. The other nine ban consensual sodomy for everyone: Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah and Virginia.

Thursday's ruling apparently invalidates those laws, as well.

Emphasis mine.

Would that mean that in, say, Alabama (I apologise to Georgia, I thought it was one of those states) it may still be on the books, but challengeable if one got brought up in charges? Or do the states then go through and strike them from the books later.

Why apparently? Why wouldn't it be definite? The article sure makes it sound definite, up to the bit where they say "apparently."

Where are the lawyers?


tommyrot - Dec 29, 2004 9:02:08 am PST #1246 of 10002
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

A while back (ten or fifteen years?) the Supreme Court ruled that it was OK for states to enforce sodomy laws on homosexuals but not heterosexuals.

I think there's a dual meaning to "sodomy" - the "traditional" definition of anal sex (straight or gay), and then a more legalistic definition of any gay or lesbian sex.

x-posty....


-t - Dec 29, 2004 9:03:04 am PST #1247 of 10002
I am a woman of various inclinations and only some of the time are they to burn everything down in frustration

A few years ago I learned that the only conviction under anti-sodomy statute in Louisiana was of a married couple. I think sodomy was loosely defined as "unnatural acts", which really doesn't clarify anything.


Matt the Bruins fan - Dec 29, 2004 9:04:22 am PST #1248 of 10002
"I remember when they eventually introduced that drug kingpin who murdered people and smuggled drugs inside snakes and I was like 'Finally. A normal person.'” —RahvinDragand

I'm now wondering what exactly a married couple did with each other to get brought up on charges, and how the authorities happened upon the incident.


§ ita § - Dec 29, 2004 9:05:05 am PST #1249 of 10002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

American Heritage defines sodomy thusly:

Any of various forms of sexual intercourse held to be unnatural or abnormal, especially anal intercourse or bestiality.

Which pretty much sums up how I'd thought it was defined, but not how I used the word (which was just to mean anal sex).

That definition makes people look really petty, doesn't it. And then I found an interesting piece on how the Sodom debacle wasn't that gay -- including details on when S&G became about homosexuality.