....cooch:


Virginia Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Cuccinelli
Asks Supreme Court to Revive Ban on Oral, Anal Sex


Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, the GOP's nominee for
governor, filed an appeal on Tuesday asking the Supreme Court to revive
the state's law banning oral and anal sex. In a statement, Cuccinelli
claimed that the law, which the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit
ruled unconstitutional earlier this year, is "an important tool that
prosecutors use to put child molesters in jail." Cuccinelli warned that
the appeals court's decision to strike down the statute "threatens to
undo convictions of child predators that were obtained under this law"
since 2003, when the Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that laws
criminalizing oral and anal sex—sometimes referred to as sodomy bans—are
unconstitutional.

As the Huffington Post reported:

Cuccinelli wants the court to reconsider a March 2013 decision by
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit striking down the state's
"crimes against nature" statute. The 4th Circuit ruled that the law did
not pass muster in light of the Supreme Court's 2003 Lawrence v. Texas
decision, which struck down the latter state's anti-sodomy law as an
unconstitutional criminalization of Americans' sexual conduct. The
Virginia law, however, remained on the books.

The 4th Circuit ruled in favor of William Scott McDonald, who was
convicted in 2005 at age 47 under the Virginia statute for soliciting a
17-year-old girl to commit sodomy. That law broadly makes oral and anal
sex a Class 6 felony. While such laws historically targeted gay men,
they have also been used against heterosexual activity.

The three-judge panel ruled that an unconstitutional law could not
be used to convict McDonald. It added that the Virginia Legislature
could pass another law to criminalize sexual conduct specifically
between a minor and an adult. The Lawrence ruling applied only to
consensual adult conduct.

Virginia has a notably low age of consent, which means, in effect, that
vaginal sex between a 47-year-old and a 17-year-old is legal, but oral
and anal sex between the same two people is not. Cuccinelli claims he
will only use the sodomy law to bring cases involving minors or sexual
assault, and argues that Virginians need not worry about him prosecuting
"consenting adults," because the part of the law that would enable him
to do so was defanged by the Supreme Court's Lawrence decision. But in
2004, when a bipartisan group of state Senators was trying to fix the
sodomy law so that it would only apply to cases involving minors and
non-consensual sex, Cuccinelli, then a state Senator, blocked the
effort. And in 2009, as my colleague Andy Kroll has noted, Cuccinelli
made clear that he objected to oral and anal sex (at least between gay
people) on principle, telling the Virginian-Pilot, "My view is that
homosexual acts—not homosexuality, but homosexual acts—are wrong.
They're intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural law-based country
it's appropriate to have policies that reflect that...They don't comport
with natural law."

As Mother Jones noted, some 90 percent of Americans would be felons if
the Virginia law were to be applied nationally. Cuccinelli has remained
mute as to whether he's one of them.

http://tinyurl.com/p9vptxp

- - -

It's almost fun watching the State of Virginia slide back into the
primordial Republican conservative pool of slime. The current Republican
governor, who wanted to inflict vaginal problems on pregnant women, is
under investigation for bribery, and the current Republican lieutenant
governor candidate is crazier than Michele Bachmann.

On Saturday, June 29, 2013 6:53:30 PM UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:
...cooch:





Virginia Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Cuccinelli

Asks Supreme Court to Revive Ban on Oral, Anal Sex





Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, the GOP's nominee for

governor, filed an appeal on Tuesday asking the Supreme Court to revive

the state's law banning oral and anal sex. In a statement, Cuccinelli

claimed that the law, which the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit

ruled unconstitutional earlier this year, is "an important tool that

prosecutors use to put child molesters in jail." Cuccinelli warned that

the appeals court's decision to strike down the statute "threatens to

undo convictions of child predators that were obtained under this law"

since 2003, when the Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that laws

criminalizing oral and anal sex�sometimes referred to as sodomy bans�are

unconstitutional.



As the Huffington Post reported:



Cuccinelli wants the court to reconsider a March 2013 decision by

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit striking down the state's

"crimes against nature" statute. The 4th Circuit ruled that the law did

not pass muster in light of the Supreme Court's 2003 Lawrence v. Texas

decision, which struck down the latter state's anti-sodomy law as an

unconstitutional criminalization of Americans' sexual conduct. The

Virginia law, however, remained on the books.



The 4th Circuit ruled in favor of William Scott McDonald, who was

convicted in 2005 at age 47 under the Virginia statute for soliciting a

17-year-old girl to commit sodomy. That law broadly makes oral and anal

sex a Class 6 felony. While such laws historically targeted gay men,

they have also been used against heterosexual activity.



The three-judge panel ruled that an unconstitutional law could not

be used to convict McDonald. It added that the Virginia Legislature

could pass another law to criminalize sexual conduct specifically

between a minor and an adult. The Lawrence ruling applied only to

consensual adult conduct.



Virginia has a notably low age of consent, which means, in effect, that

vaginal sex between a 47-year-old and a 17-year-old is legal, but oral

and anal sex between the same two people is not. Cuccinelli claims he

will only use the sodomy law to bring cases involving minors or sexual

assault, and argues that Virginians need not worry about him prosecuting

"consenting adults," because the part of the law that would enable him

to do so was defanged by the Supreme Court's Lawrence decision. But in

2004, when a bipartisan group of state Senators was trying to fix the

sodomy law so that it would only apply to cases involving minors and

non-consensual sex, Cuccinelli, then a state Senator, blocked the

effort. And in 2009, as my colleague Andy Kroll has noted, Cuccinelli

made clear that he objected to oral and anal sex (at least between gay

people) on principle, telling the Virginian-Pilot, "My view is that

homosexual acts�not homosexuality, but homosexual acts�are wrong.

They're intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural law-based country

it's appropriate to have policies that reflect that...They don't comport

with natural law."



As Mother Jones noted, some 90 percent of Americans would be felons if

the Virginia law were to be applied nationally. Cuccinelli has remained

mute as to whether he's one of them.



http://tinyurl.com/p9vptxp



- - -



It's almost fun watching the State of Virginia slide back into the

primordial Republican conservative pool of slime. The current Republican

governor, who wanted to inflict vaginal problems on pregnant women, is

under investigation for bribery, and the current Republican lieutenant

governor candidate is crazier than Michele Bachmann.

Will you be moving in with your butt-buddy..." Cockhole White", and living in his basement???

On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 18:53:30 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

...cooch:


Virginia Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Cuccinelli
Asks Supreme Court to Revive Ban on Oral, Anal Sex

The Grand Old Party of selective morality.

On 6/29/13 8:01 PM, jps wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 18:53:30 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

...cooch:


Virginia Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Cuccinelli
Asks Supreme Court to Revive Ban on Oral, Anal Sex

The Grand Old Party of selective morality.


In reality, no morality whatsoever.