Comments on: NC outrage: two men charged with sodomy - even after Lawrence v. Texas http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/ Just another WordPress weblog Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:18:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: Mortality http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518989 Tue, 27 May 2008 12:29:58 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518989 So it's illegal to give a woman oral sex, but not a man? Or did I read that law wrong? So it’s illegal to give a woman oral sex, but not a man? Or did I read that law wrong?

]]> by: mnemosyne http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518750 Mon, 26 May 2008 12:38:12 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518750 What it sounds like from the description is a domestic violence case where they decided to arrest the victim, too, but had to come up with some kind of charge in order to do it. I'm guessing the message is, "Don't call the cops if your boyfriend is beating you up -- we don't care and we'll arrest you on a bogus charge if you make us come out there." What it sounds like from the description is a domestic violence case where they decided to arrest the victim, too, but had to come up with some kind of charge in order to do it.

I’m guessing the message is, “Don’t call the cops if your boyfriend is beating you up — we don’t care and we’ll arrest you on a bogus charge if you make us come out there.”

]]> by: Picador http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518677 Mon, 26 May 2008 08:58:11 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518677 <i>If any person shall commit the crime against nature, with mankind or beast, he shall be punished as a Class I felon. </i> I think this is a terrific law. Environmental polluters are finally going to have to clean up their act. Weird that they think you might be dumping toxins in the river with your dog, though... If any person shall commit the crime against nature, with mankind or beast, he shall be punished as a Class I felon.

I think this is a terrific law. Environmental polluters are finally going to have to clean up their act.

Weird that they think you might be dumping toxins in the river with your dog, though…

]]> by: wayward http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518671 Mon, 26 May 2008 08:37:03 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518671 The cop is an asshole. But fortunately, he only has so much power. The DA would get laughed out of court if he tried to press the charges. Since Lawrence v. Texas is a widely known decision, Sloan may have a civil case against the police for false arrest. The cop is an asshole. But fortunately, he only has so much power. The DA would get laughed out of court if he tried to press the charges.

Since Lawrence v. Texas is a widely known decision, Sloan may have a civil case against the police for false arrest.

]]> by: Snookie Oookums http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518665 Mon, 26 May 2008 07:57:12 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518665 Why should ANY jurisdiction be bothered by such trivialities as Supreme Court rulings and constitutionality when it is clear that our current Justice Department pays no attention to the rule of law either. Under the current regime in the White House, and their lackies in the AG's office there has been a complete breakdown of the most basic civil rights enforcement in this country - why should this surprise anyone? Why should ANY jurisdiction be bothered by such trivialities as Supreme Court rulings and constitutionality when it is clear that our current Justice Department pays no attention to the rule of law either.

Under the current regime in the White House, and their lackies in the AG’s office there has been a complete breakdown of the most basic civil rights enforcement in this country - why should this surprise anyone?

]]> by: Nenya, Vala of Peanut-Butter Cookies http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518649 Mon, 26 May 2008 01:11:52 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518649 Eyargh. :( World worries me sometimes. Eyargh. :( World worries me sometimes.

]]> by: Drocket http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518646 Mon, 26 May 2008 00:58:03 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518646 *But there are probably places where they still do that too.* Of course, but they're at least smart enough to make up a charge against them of an actual crime. Loitering, public disturbance, maybe plant some weed on them... *But there are probably places where they still do that too.*

Of course, but they’re at least smart enough to make up a charge against them of an actual crime. Loitering, public disturbance, maybe plant some weed on them…

]]> by: paul http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518610 Sun, 25 May 2008 20:40:42 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518610 Seems to me that this would be as much false arrest and imprisonment as arresting a black person for being in town after sundown. But there are probably places where they still do that too. Seems to me that this would be as much false arrest and imprisonment as arresting a black person for being in town after sundown. But there are probably places where they still do that too.

]]> by: gordo http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518597 Sun, 25 May 2008 18:56:47 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518597 Imagine the hatred you would have to feel for someone in order to arrest him after he'd been sexually assaulted. I don't see how the Raleigh police can pretend that they're fulfilling their duty to protect the public. Imagine the hatred you would have to feel for someone in order to arrest him after he’d been sexually assaulted. I don’t see how the Raleigh police can pretend that they’re fulfilling their duty to protect the public.

]]> by: preying mantis http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518591 Sun, 25 May 2008 18:25:17 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/05/25/nc-outrage-two-men-charged-with-sodomy-even-after-lawrence-v-texas/#comment-518591 "What does ‘in private’ have to do with it if one guy sexually assaulted the other?" I think it's that they're charging both men under a law that was declared unconstitutional, provided the activity was occurring in private. They can charge the one with sexual assault, but they can't constitutionally charge both with sodomy. “What does ‘in private’ have to do with it if one guy sexually assaulted the other?”

I think it’s that they’re charging both men under a law that was declared unconstitutional, provided the activity was occurring in private. They can charge the one with sexual assault, but they can’t constitutionally charge both with sodomy.

]]>