'Our Mrs. Reynolds'
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.
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.
(not sure where you are Cass)I'm in California, which is freakishly big for a state. So Texas looks big, as befits their image, not that size matters. The rest of the country looks ... less big.
Just finished a sodomy discussion with the parents (rarely has the phrase "no, I'm not going into details" been used so often, and with such vehemence on my part).Oh dear.
as in the somewhat antiquated epithet "sodomite"
I prefer the term "gomorrahite" myself.
(Not sure if that's the correct spelling....)
And voila! one more state I had visited.
I grew up in (north) Wilmington, DE where we could drive to 3 different states in 1/2 hour or less. My Texas cousins couldn't comprehend that at all. Many of them had never left the state.
Oh dear.
It really could have gone less well. And they totally understand reading texts slashily even I didn't have the energy to go into the aspect of writing it. I think that's so charming, for a bougie older Jamaican couple.
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.
Details were not revealed. I think it was part of their agreeing to plead guilty that teh specifics wouldn't be released. I wondered, too. And now I can't remenmber where I picked up this tidbit of information.
Shoot, can't read the article on Sodom through work's net nanny. It's my husband's contention that S&G were destroyed mainly for being inhospitable to strangers.
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.
Um, sort of. That case involved two gay men, and the Supremes decided not to address heterosexual issues.
It really could have gone less well.
Well... good?
Some conversations I will never have with my parents. Thankfully.
I spent a lot of my holiday making strangled appalled noises at some of the things my SIL chose to share with me. I think she was doing it on purpose. I'm ok with my parents having sex, but for whatever reason, I really don't want to know when it comes to my brother. I just ....ok. I need to go scrub my brain after just mentioning it.
I'm ok with my parents having sex, but for whatever reason, I really don't want to know when it comes to my brother.
Oh my god me neither! With either of them. It disturbs me so much that both of my nieces were born in July. Nine months after my brother's birthday. ick!
Where are the lawyers?
See, apparently we're never around when you need us ...
Is your question about the "apparently" in the story about the US Supreme Court ruling dealing with the Texas anti-sodomy law -- about whether similar laws in other states are also unconstitutional? ("ruling apparently invalidates those laws, as well")? It's "apparently" because the Supremes did not directly say in their opinion that these other laws violated the constitution. Until some court says that they are unconstitutional, then many writers will only say that they are "apparently" unconstitutional.