Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has decided to continue the fight to preserve the state’s “crimes against nature” law that bans both oral and anal sex in both heterosexual and homosexual relations. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (considered by many to be the country’s most conservative circuit) struck down the law on obvious constitutional grounds. However, Cuccinelli has filed a motion for reconsideration to try to get that decision reversed. The current attorney general and likely GOP gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli wants to keep anti-sodomy laws on the books in Virginia.
Notably, Cuccinelli’s position contradicts the position of many in the GOP who support not just the decriminalization of homosexual relations but more recently same-sex marriage. It is a position that conflicts with basic libertarians values that motivate some in the GOP and many independents. The most basic right of Americans is, to quote Louis Brandeis, the right to be left alone. The intrusion of the government into the actual bedrooms of Americans is the ultimate expression of government power and abuse. It is also a classic form of majoritarian tyranny where neighbors insist that you live by their moral code and values. It is not the position of those who want to limit the role of government in the lives of citizens.
The law states:
Va. Code § 18.2-361(A) provides that: “If any person . . . carnally knows any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth, or voluntarily submits to such carnal knowledge, he or she shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony, except as provided in subsection B.”
Fortunately, the Fourth Circuit opinion is unassailable and will not be reversed in my view. We have grown as a nation both in terms of our laws and our values. It is not that a majority approve of these relations but they embrace the right of citizens to decide how they relate for their lovers and spouses. It is also a law that would criminalize relations that are widely practiced by citizens — condemning conduct that a majority support by their conduct. The future of such morality legislation is dim in this country not because we are less moral but because we are more tolerant and inclusive.
Source: MSNBC
It is easy and fun to make crude jokes of dumb schmucks in Virginia who elect the likes of Cuccinelli and Eric Kantor. The legal/factual anal is good as long as you keep sis out of it. And second cousins once removed too. And Y there is a y between anal and sis, I dont know. I do believe that Eddie Kantor is rolling over in his grave.
Apparently it is easier to make crude jokes than to address Mr. Walsh’s legal/factual analysis.
“Apparently it is easier to make crude jokes than to address Mr. Walsh’s legal/factual analysis.”
Mahtso,
Yes it is easier to ridicule than to discuss these sodomy laws from a legal point of view. In my opinion sodomy laws, regardless of sexual preference, are an unconstitutional invasion of the peoples’ privacy, despite their long history in the US. In my opinion anyone who even entertains the idea of the correctness of “sodomy” laws as they have been enforced in the US upon heterosexual as well as homosexual activity, is a contemptible fool. The percentages of people who take part in oral and/or anal sex according to the research of Kinsey and Masters/Johnson are so high as to consider them to be normative sexual practice. How in the world anyone can justify criminalizing normative sexual practice is beyond me and that is the real issue being discussed here.
http://www.virginiaecards.com/home/
“The Virginia State Seal makes me super uncomfortable”
His Butt must still be sore…………………
mespo:
is he finished politically? I cannot see conservatives voting for him after this, at least fiscal conservatives who are, more often than not, social liberals due to a libertarian streak.
The Bedchamber Militia is alive and well in Virginia.
http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/myeasternshoremd.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/3/8c/38ccdd66-63d8-11e2-8ed3-0019bb2963f4/50fd52e5274cb.image.jpg
here is Ken’s contact info:
Mailing Address
10560 Main Street
Suite 218
Fairfax, VA 22030
Telephone
703-766-0635
I called and left a message.
This is just laughable, this has got to be a belated April fools joke.
He is done politically and if he isnt? Aphrodite help us all.
Ken Cuccinelli — Leading Virginia’s Growing De-evolution Movement!
Are we not
menmisogynists?after this, I can’t believe he is a contender for office in Virginia. What is he thinking? Or maybe Virginia isnt for Lovers after all.
There are going to be a good many people breaking that law.
Civil Disobedience Henry David Thoreau could get behind [if you know what I mean, wink, wink]
“NTTAWWT”
I believe the desire to keep laws like this is not as much from a conservative religious or moral perspective as it is from a authoritarian loving perspective. Laws like this make just about everyone a criminal. Of course, the government cannot prosecute everyone however. So, it uses its discretion to punish those it wants to target. This seems like a violation of the spirit of the rule of law because now everyone is a criminal and the government picks and chooses who it wants to go after for reasons unrelated to the crime for which the person is charged. We need to stop making everyone a criminal with overly broad laws which are left to the “beneficent” discretion of prosecutors for who to apply them to.
One job that we dont want this Italian guy to get in Virginia is Dog Catcher. Let him catch humans humpin each other. What is up with these Italian guys who go right wing RepubliCon and go off on things that are common in Italy. We all know that Mussolini was gay.
We had a discussion in the dogpac and do not believe that the Virgiina laws apply to dogs. If it does then please advise. HumpinDog has a cousin in Richmond who is very worried.
“No, honey, I know you love to give me blowjobs, but that would be wrong because it’s unnatural and against the law.”
–no old white Republican, ever
Kevin – Darn right its significant! If the missus & I can’t occasionally provide a little oral loving for each other while we are in VA I will consider that a full on assault of the traditional definition of marriage!!
Further, I want every judge involved and everyone pleading for the prohibition of “sodomy” to swear under oath with the threat of perjury that they have not ever engaged in, as either a provider or a recipient of any sort of activity that would be prohibited under a sodomy law.
Cuccinelli could contend as the worst person on the political scene. Also if he is certain about the need for these sodomy laws then I believe his wife has suffered sexually through the years.
This post is based on a press report that itself is based on a press report, not on legal analysis. Moreover, filtering this through a political lens, as these press reports and this post have done, provides a distorted picture of the legal issues. Here is a link to the Virginia state court decision that the Fourth Circuit said was “contrary to, or
involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established
Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the
United States.” The Virginia state court decided two things: (1) the defendant could not challenge the law except insofar as it had been applied to him; and (2) the law was not unconstitutional as applied because an adult’s solicitation of oral sex from a minor is not constitutionally protected under Lawrence v. Texas. Neither of these determinations is contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Fourth Circuit itself routinely applies the first principle. And the second principle rests on an extension of Lawrence. Even if that extension were warranted, it does not suffice for habeas review. As for the predictions about en banc rehearing, that is a close call. Professor Turley’s description of the Fourth Circuit as “considered by many to be the country’s most conservative circuit” is outdated. It is unclear if he himself holds the view that the court is conservative, but if he does, he is wrong. Moreover, a conservative/liberal divide does not map neatly onto predictions about how a vote whether to take this case en banc might go; the dissenting judge in this case was appointed by President Obama while the two judges in the majority were appointed by President Clinton. The dissenting judge is right about in the middle of the en banc court (together with the current Chief Judge, a Clinton appointee). And that middle is broad. If it has a tilt, it is not rightward. More important than ideological analysis, in this case, is analysis of the factors under FRAP 35. En banc review is not for simple error correction, but a holding that a state statute is facially unconstitutional (and not just unconstitutional as applied to constitutionally protected conduct) is a significant ruling. And the fact that the ruling was sought as part of a coordinated campaign by a national legal group and prominent law professors is another indication of the decision’s significance.
The desire by some Republicans to dictate how others live their lives contradicts conservative beliefs – nevertheless, the desire to impose values on others drives the Republican party (and drives others away).
I have often felt that the Republican party is leaving its conservative principles; how should a conservative vote?
Cuccinelli is terrible on women’s healthcare issues, also. The race with McAuliffe is pretty close but Cuccinelli may just have handed him northern Virginia.
“Fortunately, the Fourth Circuit opinion is unassailable and will not be reversed in my view.”
The 2-1 vote of the panel shows how religiously conservative the 4th Cir is.
I do not expect the granting of an en banc rehearing or the granting of a writ of certiorari in the S.Ct.