Should America make sodomy illegal?

Question

your take please

The case which the Supreme Court stroke down the Texas sodomy law

Answer 1

As a fiscal conservative I think is an intrusion of the federal government to decide what sexual act is illegal. What goes behind closed doors between consenting adults is nobody's business. Who is the government to decide that butt-******* is wrong?

Answer 2

As of 46 years ago, every single state in the country DID make sodomy illegal. The statute was not exactly the same in every state, because some states defined "sodomy" in different ways. In general, the sodomy statutes could have been put into two different categories: one which defined sodomy as a particular sex act but banned that sex act between all persons, no matter what their sex; and one which only banned same-sex sexual contact. But every single state had one of those two kinds of sodomy laws.

Illinois became the first state to de-criminalize. The legislature proactively repealed the law. Later, in the 1970s and 1980s, more states followed Illinois' example. Most of the time, legalization occurred because the legislature repealed the laws. Sometimes, some state courts ruled that the laws were in violation of the state Constition. As of 1986, about half of the states still banned sodomy. That year, the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution does not prohibit those laws (Bowers v. Hardwick). By 2003, only 13 states still banned sodomy, with those state laws still being divided into the two categories.

In 2003, the Supreme Court lied about the Constitution and, in so doing, overturned the 1986 ruling. The Court had it right the first time. Laws banning sodomy are constitutionally permissible and the Supreme Court had no business saying otherwise.

And there is still one law banning same-sex sexual contact in "America." That law is in the federal government, not the states. The law is in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The Armed Forces will still kick you out if you engage in homosexual behavior. It isn't a "crime," but it's grounds for dismissal.

I still want for the Court's ruling in 2003 to be overturned. Not because I want sodomy to be "banned," but because I want the Court to tell the truth about the U.S. Constitution. I'm absolutely sick of judicial activism. I want some state to re-create a law against "sodomy," I want someone to get arrested for violating that new law, I want for that person's case to go up to the Supreme Court, I want for the parties to agree that they will address the question of whether Lawrence v. Texas should be overturned, and I want the Court to overturn it -- by telling the truth about the Constitution. Then, when all that's done, I want for the state which had re-created the sodomy law to go back once again and repeal it.

Answer 3

the only justification to have a law is if there is a good reason to have that law. there is no good reason for laws against sodomy (popular and religious prejudice do not count as good reasons) and so there is no justification to have that law. All the law did was allow the government to interfere in the private sexual activities of consenting adults. It is a gross violation of basic freedoms at worst, and an unnecessary law that would give the police a tool to harass people they don't like at best. The freedom to perform a private sexual act with another consenting adult is an extremely basic freedom.

Answer 4

Sodomy, like abortion and stem-cell research, is not political really. Many arguments against them are religious in nature, and rest are social in nature. Sodomy should be looked at like a walk around your neighborhood at 4 in the morning: with great suspicion and some anxiety, but totally legal.

Answer 5

All that replaced into desperate in Lawrence v Texas is that any act this is criminal between heterosexual additionally are criminal between homosexuals. If it relatively is unlawful for a guy and a woman to screw interior the trees at a highway relax stops, the comparable is against the regulation for 2 adult men. specific acts are nevertheless defined as sodomy, even with gender, and proceed to be unlawful after Lawrence v Texas.

Answer 6

It is already illegal in most states. Since men and boys cannot physically be raped it is called sodomy which also applies to women. This does not allude to consensual sex between two people whether it be a man and woman having anal sex or a man/man consensual sex.

That is why the rape law exist. No means NO for eveyone for everything.

Answer 7

I think it is illegal, but what 2 consenting adults want to do in the privacy of their own house should be there own business, I belive oral and anal sex would continue even though it is outlawed. I don't know of any other kind of sodomy

Answer 8

define sodomy first

Answer 9

If you did that you would have to put the recent head of 40,000,000 Evangelicals in jail.

Answer 10

Who exactly would enforce that? The a.ss police?