So its illegal for even straight couples to have oral sex? I guess that means kissing as well =p. Carnal things that people do everyday must be against the law. Oh well. This is just batshit crazy.
[url=http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/02/06/michigan-republicans-pass-bill-that-would-put-gay-and-straight-couples-in-prison/]http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/02/06/michigan-republicans-pass-bill-that-would-put-gay-and-straight-couples-in-prison/[/url]
Depends upon the area of the country. In some counties in the South, yes. The law was designed for homosexuals.
[quote=âBiosynth, post:1, topic:7151â]So its illegal for even straight couples to have oral sex? I guess that means kissing as well =p. Carnal things that people do everyday must be against the law. Oh well. This is just batshit crazy.
[url=http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/02/06/michigan-republicans-pass-bill-that-would-put-gay-and-straight-couples-in-prison/]http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/02/06/michigan-republicans-pass-bill-that-would-put-gay-and-straight-couples-in-prison/[/url][/quote]
Sorry, by âlikingâ the post earlier I was not liking the law, just that you posted it so people would know it was ridiculous⌠This is craziness. I have also heard of similar obscure laws condemning any sex but missionary between straight married couplesâŚwill have to find the sources on that though. Like what are they gonna do, creep up to the window? Who gets to be the sex police? This is absurd and designed to discriminate everyone, but especially gay people. May it be struck down.
This bitâs even crazier: âThat includes Ken Cuccinelli in Virginia who tried to outlaw âcarnal knowledgeâ between married couples in 2013 as he failed to become the stateâs governor.â
Carnal knowlredge, last I heard, meant sex?
And afaik itâs actually UN-Biblical to ban that in a marriage, ref: the way some Catholic marriages can be annulled if sex doesnât occur?
You sure have some batfuck crazy people in them United StatesâŚ
Is this for real? I really find it hard to comprehend the reasoning behind this. This is definitely one of the craziest laws iâve ever seen lol.
They can suck my cock!
Sorry, couldnât resist.
Well, a long while back I read a man in Singapore got a public caning (enough to put him in the hospital) for spitting on tbe ground. I believe he was a tourist and didnt know any better. Well⌠This goes to Lady Eva and her specific fascination with religion (as far as mot being too fond of it)âŚthat this is what happens when you let religious people be in control. I think a project should be to do a Massive Worldwide Lust spell to make people Horny and Angry at these laws =p. That would account for alot of Hot SexâŚfyi Beleth would be the one to call on for this I believe
Fuck me, that feeling when you read a thread and suddenly see your own name, dropped like a red-hot coal, in the middle of it�!! lol!!
Islam, Xianity, Judaism, hell Iâll even chuck in Hinduism - they all sanction penis-in-vagina reproductive sex, so that dude I quoted above is far-out with his nonsense.
And anyone sensible knows that âGodâ/evolution etc., didnât put the male prostate gland where it is, just so that it could be ignored⌠
Excellent point! 
Itâs like the lady in USA doing this whole petition thing for Deadpool to be cut down to PG13 so her brat could see it.
If you cannot handle the âadultâ themes, stay out of the equation. lol
Most of these laws were passed just so it was legal to arrest gay people engaging in any sex act and heterosexuals that were either having premarital sex or committing adultery. Cops didnât go around peeking in peopleâs windows. They were usually tipped off by nosy neighbors or raided places like gay clubs and bathhouses. Back in the day (as late as the 50s, I believe), men could be arrested for âseductionâ or breach of promise (i.e. Guy sweet talks a woman, tells her he loves her and heâs going to marry her, she has sex with him and then he bails). Frank Sinatra was arrested for seducing a woman (twice!) in the 40s. Of course it all depended on who the participants were. Cops werenât going around busting poor people for having premarital sex, cheating or bailing on some promised marriage.
Basically it was all just phony, Puritanical bullshit designed to embarrass and scare people into not doing what the powers that be think is icky or immoral. A lot of states still have sodomy and âunnatural sexâ laws on the books but theyâre really not enforced. I think most people now agree that two consenting adults doing whatever they want together is not the business of governmental bodies or law enforcement. Iâm actually surprised the government hasnât found a way to tax the shit out of citizens having sex. They tax your ass eat, shit and even die, so a sex tax canât be far off.
Do this law apply to the politicians who made it âillegalâ, in the first place? Yet they always get away with disobedience of their own laws, and that apply to any odd laws out there.
They probably have a kinkfest in the Michigan congress at this moment, celebrating the new law with other republicans. Orally, of course. 
That was because they had no reliable contraception back then, and far less access to legal safe abortions - a woman who had a child outside marriage was socially shunned and her child often carried the burden as well, and even if she didnât get pregnant, finding a new fiance after losing her virginity would be much harder.
Itâs hard for us to imagine but a womanâs entire life could be wrecked over having sex once, especially because marriage was her only probable means of support: sheâd be unable to get a good job that paid the same wages a man would receive, whereas for the guy, he lost nothing at all and walked away smiling, so there was a legit reason for this, given the morality of the time.
I think people who want to push for such ridiculous legislation should go, spend some serious time in a Muslim country, where the âreligious policeâ are knocking on doors and windows and where a woman can be publicly caned for standing and talking with a man, who is not her spouse or relative. Then they can ask themselves:
The laws in my state until somewhat recently were specifically anything that was not hetero was illegal. Classified as a D felony I believe. Hetero couples could engage in any sort of consent url sex legally. A group of lesbians took it to the Supreme Court to change things. I live in the South.
I got an ex next door neighbour that would be perfect for the job 
[quote=âLilithflower, post:14, topic:7151â]I think people who want to push for such ridiculous legislation should go, spend some serious time in a Muslim country, where the âreligious policeâ are knocking on doors and windows and where a woman can be publicly caned for standing and talking with a man, who is not her spouse or relative. Then they can ask themselves:
Im not into conspiracy theories, but to Titillate that crowd you could entertain the fact that there are already Muslims everywhere in the world. Strangely the whole conspiracy of the new world as proposed by fear mongers is similar to Sharia Law, where say Muslims would be useful candidates as natural enforcers as they grew with this type of thinking. Ok Im done spreading the fear of the Super Muslim Republic of Devils at your doorstep trying to tell you how to live =)
That was because they had no reliable contraception back then, and far less access to legal safe abortions - a woman who had a child outside marriage was socially shunned and her child often carried the burden as well, and even if she didnât get pregnant, finding a new fiance after losing her virginity would be much harder.
Itâs hard for us to imagine but a womanâs entire life could be wrecked over having sex once, especially because marriage was her only probable means of support: sheâd be unable to get a good job that paid the same wages a man would receive, whereas for the guy, he lost nothing at all and walked away smiling, so there was a legit reason for this, given the morality of the time.[/quote]
I suppose that could have been the reason for the law, but I tend to think it was more about forced morality. The only men that got nabbed for breach of promise, etc. were men that made the grevious mistake of going back on their word to women with money. They were the ones who could afford a lawyer, court fees, etc. I donât think the government really gave a damn if poor women ended up as single mothers who were shunned and would have trouble finding work.
I would not mind having that charge on my record, just to hear people say
"It says here that you were booked on (insert number here) counts of cunnilingus."
[quote=âAnarchifer, post:19, topic:7151â]I would not mind having that charge on my record, just to hear people say
"It says here that you were booked on (insert number here) counts of cunnilingus."[/quote]
Hah I can see it now;
âWhy yes maâam, thatâs correct ;)â
Why would anyone be afraid of London?
[quote=âAnarchifer, post:19, topic:7151â]I would not mind having that charge on my record, just to hear people say
âIt says here that you were booked on (insert number here) counts of cunnilingus.â[/quote]
Dunno about the other ladies on here, but Iâve always felt I should do more work to rehabilitate criminals⌠:o)