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.

See, I don't know why people go nuts over Nascar, when you could film Storrow Drive or Route 128 aka (sometimes) 95 aka (sometimes) 93. You get almost as many crashes and it looks a hell of a lot more challenging than Roundy-round.

It's too backed up to get any real speed though.

I actually get freaked out when I'm visiting the midwest, and there's less frequent slowdowns - people drive WAY faster than in the Boston area, where you can't get to a decent cruising speed before you have to slow down to go through a rotary/pay a toll/ look at stuff.

That may be me and my many years driving in Boston. but I honestly don't think that Boston drivers are any crazier than anywhere else. It's just the driving infrastructure is nutty and it's easy to get lost and never find yur way back due to crappy signage/one way streets/interstate highways on ramps tucked in quiet neighborhoods. People do drive way aggressively, but not all that fast (to their great and perplexing -to me- annoyance)

And, sara, I wanted to make this a separate post to help remove the icky how brothers reproduce connotation but I wanted to say that your nephew IS mighty cute! I love him and his reaction to the dinosaurs picture! Also, the Wiggles songs will now be permanently in your brain. Try not to fight it too much.

When I lived in NC, there was a husband-wife rape case; the husband claimed the intercourse was consensual, so he was prosecuted for sodomy, which you can't consent to. It was oral sex, if I recall correctly and I may not.

Oral sex is definitely illegal in NC for everybody.

but I honestly don't think that Boston drivers are any crazier than anywhere else.

I have NEVER lived anywhere else where it was understood that you didn't cross the intersection when the light turned green, because if you did you would be broadsided by the oncoming traffic turning left.

Here is something from 2000, but I don't think it's what I was thinking of. It involves heterosexual oral sex.