Log in

No account? Create an account
A Shout Out to My Pepys [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
The American Caliban

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Links:| Dad Pinboard Last.fm Subscribe to me [Friendfeed] Flickr ]

Our tribe does not permit this; tabu. [Mar. 26th, 2003|10:53 pm]
The American Caliban
[Current Mood |blank]


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.

[User Picture]From: jwz
2003-03-26 11:07 pm (UTC)
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.)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: substitute
2003-03-26 11:23 pm (UTC)
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.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: brianenigma
2003-03-27 12:47 am (UTC)

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

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 loose_joints 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...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: srl
2003-03-27 10:59 am (UTC)

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

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.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: miss_geek
2003-03-26 11:57 pm (UTC)
i heard npr's take on this today... in the form of dialog from the justice's and what not... that texas place is weird =P
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: gynocide
2003-03-27 12:32 am (UTC)
Cool icon. Is it new?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: substitute
2003-03-27 01:32 am (UTC)
had it for about a month. i've been wanting to do a lamerbus icon ever since i saw one of those buses!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: frobisher
2003-03-27 09:10 am (UTC)
When I saw a couple go by recently, I thought of you. :-)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: flipzagging
2003-03-27 12:29 pm (UTC)
For your double shot of disturbment, check out Slate's digest of the Supreme Court arguments.

Go, Justice Scalia!
(Reply) (Thread)