Sexual Crimes Talk Includes Sodomy
A Kansas attorney recently gave a lecture on sexual crimes, like statuatory rape. Despite the fact that Supreme Court case Lawrence v. Texas basically nulled the nation's anti- sodomy laws with Lawrence v. Texas, John Wheeler decided to remind his audience that sodomy remains illegal in Kansas: "'When people look at the definition of sodomy, they say, 'Hey, wait a minute. That covers homosexual acts,' " said Wheeler, whose PowerPoint presentation emphasized that such sex is "UNLAWFUL in Kansas… 'It is on the books. It does remain unlawful. Whether or not it would be upheld constitutionally, I don't know.' he said." The answer is no. [Hutchinson News]
Scroll Posts
Former Clintonite DNC Chair To Endorse Obama « Next — Prev » Trans History 101 BC
Queerty Team
Editor
Japhy Grant Editorial Director
David Hauslaib Publisher
Jossip Initiatives
Our Network
Jossip The gossip's gossip sheet
Mollygood Splaying celebrities from A- to D-list
Stereohyped Once you blog black, you never go back
About
Advertise
Privacy
RSS
Copyright 2008 Jossip Initiatives LLC
Dictum in Lawrence v Texas pretty explicitly stated that all laws criminalizing sex acts which occur in private between consenting adults were unconstitutional. I doubt the Supreme Court will revisit this issue, and all lower courts should follow this precedent. It would be interesting to find out how many challenges of other state laws like this there have been: prosecutions under such laws were rare to begin with.
I live in Kansas. Even after the laws were nullified, the last state attorney general
would argue cases, forcing people to appeal
to the state supreme court and some still are
in jail waiting appeals. Kansas has too many
conservatives that try to out do each other
thinking up new anti-sex laws. There are
12 and 13 year old registered sex offenders
here who did not do much more than "I'll show
you mine, if you show me yours" type things.
That's an outrageous waste of time and taxpayers' money. They know full well that these appeals will be ultimately successful. I think it says a lot that Kansas is behind the military.
I'm not joking.
Even the very conservative U.S. Court of Military Appeals has ruled that Lawrence v. Texas applies in most circumstances that doesn't involve abuse of authority (SEE United States v. Stirewalt and United States v. Marcum).
While the ban on gays in the military remains because of DADT, this is administrative rather than criminal law. As it stands, the Pentagon can no longer use Article 125 of the UCMJ as a justification. If Congress and the President reverses DADT, the ban on gays in the military is kaput.