"John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote in message
news:GdWa9.14839$Ic7.1400423 at news2.west.cox.net...
>> "Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
> news:s12omusunoop7mpmog631td3c7v2fv7n0j at 4ax.com...> > "John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
> > >"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
> > >> >> >Not one single adultery law has ever been repealed, but the last
> > >prosecution
> > >> >> >under this law was more than half a century ago.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Good.
> > >> >
> > >> >Thanks for that admission that you support the "right of women to
> commit
> > >> >adultery"--making you an accomplice to a serious crime.
> > >>
> > >> I admit no such thing. I admit approving that prosecution for
> > >> adultery is becoming rare. But I remind you that California's law
> > >> against adultery, that you quote on your website, WAS in fact
> > >> repealed, and there is no law against adultery in California.
> > >
> > >No, the law in California has NOT been repealed, which means adultery
is
> > >ILLEGAL.
> >
> > It has. The text that you quote from the 1911 Penal Code is nowhere
> > to be found in the current California Penal Code, which is available
> > on the Web in its entirety. ALL sexual activities between *consenting
> > adults* were decriminalized in 1975 and 1976, including your favorite
> > bugaboo of sodomy. Every last one. If you look at section 286 of the
> > Penal Code, it refers ONLY to sodomy (as specifically defined) with a
> > *minor*.
> >
> > I challenge you to find it anywhere in the California penal code
> > http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html> > where adultery per se is illegal. You will find the word exactly
> > once, and it refers only to adultery within the limits of
> > consanguinity (i.e. incest)
> >
> > Since you cite on your page that it was a law in 1911, and it is not a
> > law now, then it unquestionably has been repealed. If you think it
> > hasn't, then provide a proper citation to the current law, preferably
> > with a quote of the full text.
> >
> > >285. Persons being within the degrees of consanguinity within which
> > >marriages are declared by law to be incestuous and void, who
> > >intermarry with each other, or who commit fornication or adultery
> > >with each other, are punishable by imprisonment in the state prison.
> >
> > >No state law against adultery has ever been repealed, not even in
> > >Pennsylvania where there was a RUMOR that it was repealed. It's still
> law
> > >in Pennsylvania.
> >
> > Give us a cite for this law, and preferably quote its full text.
> >
> > I'm not going to search every state for you. I found one site that
> > said that there are adultery laws in 37 states but did not list them,
> > which means that adultery is legal in the other 13. Probably, in most
> > of those states, there was once a law and it has been repealed.
> >
> > In Virginia, adultery is a class 4 misdemeanor, punishable by a fine
> > of no more than $250. hardly a "serious crime".
> >
> > http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2269/> > is a general reference site on sex laws.
> >
> > The alt.sex FAQ lists states that had repealed their sodomy laws,
> > 26 states are listed. Another 8 states have had sodomy laws found
> > unconstitutional to varying degrees.
> >
> > >By stating "Good" when it's noted that the law is not being upheld, you
> are
> > >an accomplice to a CRIME,
> >
> > False.
> >
> > >and a serious crime at that.
> >
> > In your opinion. Not in the eyes of the State of California, where it
> > is not a crime at all, or the Commonwealth of Virginia, where it is in
> > the least serious category of misdemeanors.
> >
> > >It's just as serious
> > >a crime as murder, which is why it's right next to "You shall not
murder"
> in
> > >the Ten Commandments.
> >
> > US laws are not based on the Ten Commandments.
> >
> > >You might "think" that those who commit adultery shouldn't be punished,
> but
> > >unless and until the law IS repealed,
> >
> > Which it apparently has been in 13 states.
> >
> > lojbab
>>> If you cannot produce the date, author, and bill number of the statute
which
> repealed a single state statute like the adultery statute, then it has not
> been repealed, and you know it.
>> And you cannot do that.
>> But the simple fact that *you*, a boneheaded "liberal", "think" that
> adultery law is meaningless, or should be ignored, or is a minor event, is
> just one more piece of evidence that you're a total moron who doesn't even
> deserve the protection of the US Constitution.
>> It also puts you in a very small minority group, once again, since even
> Gallup shows that only a pitiful 9% minority agree with you.
>> John Knight
>
Here we go yet again.
I guess you cannot read. I highly suggest you take a remedial reading
class.
Are you suggesting that, simply by the fact that it is NOT listed in the
current California penal code - that it exists, somewhere?
Maybe in your manifesto, but certainly not in California law.
--
The Shadow Dancer
aka Insomniac
irc.peacefulhaven.net
Lifetime member of MEOWS, NHOFB, PLOW and SWWOP
When you mess with dragons - you get burnt!
