Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Hanxter · 02-25-2004, 01:52 PM

Cohabitation - Fornication

Historically, cohabitation and “fornication,” defined as unlawful sexual intercourse between two unmarried persons, was illegal in most states. Maryland has no laws making fornication or cohabitation illegal, nor does cohabitation constitute the Maryland common-law offense of “lewdness,” or “unnatural sexual practice.”

Currently, the District of Columbia and eleven states, still have criminal laws penalizing fornication. A handful of states, have laws making cohabitation a crime. While these laws do exist, they are rarely enforced.

Thirteen states make it a crime for an unmarried man and woman to engage in consensual sodomy in private (which is defined as oral or anal sex or both): Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia fall into this category. A handful of states only prohibit sodomy between individuals of the same sex.

Laws prohibiting consensual sodomy have been used to put defendants in prison for consensual heterosexual sex with another adult. Even when juries have found defendants not guilty of rape, on the rationale that the conduct was consensual, they have found defendants guilty of sodomy because the judge had instructed the jury that, unlike rape, consent is not a defense to the crime of sodomy.

In Maryland, the Court of Appeals held in Schochet v. Statethat the law banning “unnatural sexual practices” did not apply to consensual, non-commercial, heterosexual acts between adults in the privacy of the home. At least one trial court has extended this ruling to same-sex couples. source

There was a case featured in the November 1996 issue of "Marie Claire" involving an Atlanta wife who tried to have her soon-to-be ex-husband charged with rape. She had persuaded her then hubby to tie her up and later used the bondage as a means of proving that the sex had not been consensual. Her sister came forward and informed the court of the plot against the man, but there was another twist in the story.

Although the man was acquitted on the rape charge, the man was sentenced to five years in jail for having performed oral sex on the woman. He had admitted to that during the course of the case and so he was charged and sentenced under Georgia law.

while the above are exerpts of what i found - and trying not to flood this thread - it occures to me that the laws, if made national, would have a wide ranging effect on state constitutions...

archaic as they may be, the cost to implement the changes would be astronomical - the far reaching effect would be tied up in courts for years, i.e. should a cohabitation agreement be reached between consenting partners, would they be valid should a marriage occur? upon the death of a spouse, would the inherritance established prior to marriage be valid?

common law marriages are often in dispute due to such questions...

There are really two types of common law marriages. The "traditional" common law marriage is one which is entered into without formalities. This type of marriage is usually defined as the intent to be married combined with living together and holding one's self out to the world as married. States which recognize the "traditional" form of common law marriage include (as of 1998) Alabama, Colorado, District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho (only if before 1-1-96), Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Ohio (only if before 10-10-91), Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Texas.

A different kind of common law marriage is represented by the situation where a valid marriage is formed from an invalid marriage after the impediment is lifted. For example, a party might be underage at the time of the marriage. Continued cohabitation as husband and wife after the underage party attains majority, however, results in the marriage ripening into validity where this form of common law marriage is recognized. Note that the courts may be reluctant to find a valid marriage when the parties have entered into a relationship knowing it to be polygamous, even after the impediment to marriage has been terminated.
source

i guess my issue is not so much with same sex marriages, doesn't have anything to do with the way i live nor do i feel they should be singled out, but to the extent the relative state's constitutions will tie up the courts and turn into another Roe v. Wade

02-25-2004, 01:52 PM	#35 (permalink)
Hanxter The Griffin	Cohabitation - Fornication Historically, cohabitation and “fornication,” defined as unlawful sexual intercourse between two unmarried persons, was illegal in most states. Maryland has no laws making fornication or cohabitation illegal, nor does cohabitation constitute the Maryland common-law offense of “lewdness,” or “unnatural sexual practice.” Currently, the District of Columbia and eleven states, still have criminal laws penalizing fornication. A handful of states, have laws making cohabitation a crime. While these laws do exist, they are rarely enforced. Thirteen states make it a crime for an unmarried man and woman to engage in consensual sodomy in private (which is defined as oral or anal sex or both): Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia fall into this category. A handful of states only prohibit sodomy between individuals of the same sex. Laws prohibiting consensual sodomy have been used to put defendants in prison for consensual heterosexual sex with another adult. Even when juries have found defendants not guilty of rape, on the rationale that the conduct was consensual, they have found defendants guilty of sodomy because the judge had instructed the jury that, unlike rape, consent is not a defense to the crime of sodomy. In Maryland, the Court of Appeals held in Schochet v. Statethat the law banning “unnatural sexual practices” did not apply to consensual, non-commercial, heterosexual acts between adults in the privacy of the home. At least one trial court has extended this ruling to same-sex couples. source There was a case featured in the November 1996 issue of "Marie Claire" involving an Atlanta wife who tried to have her soon-to-be ex-husband charged with rape. She had persuaded her then hubby to tie her up and later used the bondage as a means of proving that the sex had not been consensual. Her sister came forward and informed the court of the plot against the man, but there was another twist in the story. Although the man was acquitted on the rape charge, the man was sentenced to five years in jail for having performed oral sex on the woman. He had admitted to that during the course of the case and so he was charged and sentenced under Georgia law. while the above are exerpts of what i found - and trying not to flood this thread - it occures to me that the laws, if made national, would have a wide ranging effect on state constitutions... archaic as they may be, the cost to implement the changes would be astronomical - the far reaching effect would be tied up in courts for years, i.e. should a cohabitation agreement be reached between consenting partners, would they be valid should a marriage occur? upon the death of a spouse, would the inherritance established prior to marriage be valid? common law marriages are often in dispute due to such questions... There are really two types of common law marriages. The "traditional" common law marriage is one which is entered into without formalities. This type of marriage is usually defined as the intent to be married combined with living together and holding one's self out to the world as married. States which recognize the "traditional" form of common law marriage include (as of 1998) Alabama, Colorado, District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho (only if before 1-1-96), Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Ohio (only if before 10-10-91), Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Texas. A different kind of common law marriage is represented by the situation where a valid marriage is formed from an invalid marriage after the impediment is lifted. For example, a party might be underage at the time of the marriage. Continued cohabitation as husband and wife after the underage party attains majority, however, results in the marriage ripening into validity where this form of common law marriage is recognized. Note that the courts may be reluctant to find a valid marriage when the parties have entered into a relationship knowing it to be polygamous, even after the impediment to marriage has been terminated. source i guess my issue is not so much with same sex marriages, doesn't have anything to do with the way i live nor do i feel they should be singled out, but to the extent the relative state's constitutions will tie up the courts and turn into another Roe v. Wade Last edited by Hanxter; 02-25-2004 at 01:57 PM..