brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Bob LeChevalier lojbab at
Wed Aug 28 16:22:18 EST 2002

"John Knight" <jwknight at> wrote:
>"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at> wrote in message
>news:1japmuksr25ritsgtc0jgfpr30qlbc1psi at
>> "John Knight" <jwknight at> wrote:
>> >State statutes and Constitutions don't just expire.  They must be
>> >or amended, and there's a very specific process for doing that.  If this
>> >process hasn't been followed precisely, it makes no difference what's in
>> >"penal code"--the law still stands.
>> Since the Penal code contains all the laws that still stand, the fact
>> that it is NOT in the penal code means that the statute was repealed
>> or amended according to the specific process for doing so.  I even
>> identified the timeframe when it was probably done, because I found
>> several references to laws passed in California which decriminalized
>> all forms of sexual activity between two consenting adults in 1976.
>> There was an earlier amendment to the laws that went into effect July
>> 1, 1944.  The only reference to that date that I found, however, was
>> AB 1555 in 2001, which also refers to other offenses that were
>> decriminalized on January 1, 1976, which matches with the date given
>> in others sources for decriminalizing sex between consenting adults.
>> The online California law library does not go back to 1976, so it
>> would take looking in an older law library.  But since I was a voting
>> resident of California in 1976, I remembered there being such a law
>> passed.
>This is not the way it works.

Yes it is.

>If a statute is not repealed,

It was repealed.

>it remains the
>LAW.  NONE of these statutes you claim were "decriminalized" were ever
>properly repealed.

It was "properly repealed".  If it were not, it would still be in the
California Penal Code.  And "statutes" are not decriminalized.
Formerly criminal ACTIONS are "decriminalized.

>It is STUPID for you to claim that "all forms of sexual
>activity between two consenting adults in 1976" when people are getting
>sentenced and imprisoned for a LONG time for violating these laws, as we

Provide one example of someone even CHARGED since 1976 (much less
convicted) of violating the 1911 Penal Code adultery law


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list