Virginia AG wants to criminalize oral and anal sex

I don't think that is his agenda, but I do think he might be going about this the wrong way. I think he wants to make sure these 90 sexual predators who engaged in sex with minors don't get out of their sentences based on a change in the way their sentences are reviewed under the change of legislation. I blame Virginia for not charging these predators properly, if a change like this would affect their sentences.

 

I don't know if it does. I'm wondering, however, if the law when applied to a case of an adult having sex with a minor adds time for the act of sodomy. I think it would be easier for Virginia to toughen their laws to make sure that the sentencing of a pedophile reflects what their constituents want.

 

Why don't they just modify the normal pedophilia/molestation/rape laws to have larger sentences?

And why don't they modify the existing law to make it clear that it does not apply to consensual sodomy?

Reason for both: They want the law to criminalize consensual sodomy so they can imprison gays.

 

It's all sodomy. Anything that isn't vaginal intercourse is sodomy.

The law DOESN'T strictly deal with sex between an adult and a minor.

 

I know that this is a thread about sodomy, which includes oral sex, yet the poster I quoted and others only seem to concetrate on anal sex as to degrade homosexuals.

 

Not sure that displaying as legal a sex act with the lower digestive tract that leaves participants extremely susceptible to HIV infection is the right thing to do for kids.

I repeat: >> http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...boys-ages-13-29-getting-hiv-last-7-years.html

The law they are passing is a deterrent law, not an enforceable one. Deterrent laws have their function too. Good for them.

 

I don't think that is the agenda. Changing the laws now, while a good idea, won't stop these 90 criminals from getting released because they can't be charged again for their past crimes. I think his good intentions of keeping these people in jail is overshadowing the damage that would occur if a new law like this is passed. Even though he might not mean it to, someone else down the line might be apt to abuse it.

 

If a law isn't enforced, then how is it a deterrent?

Also, why do you believe that it is the government's job to conduct social engineering and regulate what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes?

 

Indeed. However, the poster was specific in talking about one act that has significant health risks. The replier decided to score points by talking about something else.

 

Have you just been completely willfully ignoring the quotes from this Tea Party-supported "small government Conservative" on how he thinks that the law should reflect homosexual act being "unnatural"?

He wants the law to criminalize consensual sex between gays.

 

Really? If you lived in Virginia this law would deter you from engaging in oral sex with your significant other?

 

So only homosexuals have anal sex? You might want to get educated. The poster you quoted focused on the heath risks of anal sex. You decided to try to be funny. Sorry if you are butthurt over it. Oops. Was that politically incorrect?

 

Not me smallblue. Little kids. Did you miss that important part? It's a deterrent law meant for kids to see that the state officially denounces sodomy that is killing them from the new fad. Please folks, don't act dumb like you don't know somehow that little kids form their permanent view of the world by what they see adults modeling as normal...


>>http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...boys-ages-13-29-getting-hiv-last-7-years.html

 

Perhaps what you should do is read the law that he is proposing. In that law, it does not differentiate between minors and adults for said acts. In other words, he is trying to get the sodomy laws back into the legal fray where governmemt can now enter in your own bedroom.

 

Considering that more than half of those ages in that age group are adults, why are they called "boys" or "little kids"? Is it because you are deliberately trying to mislead (aka LIE) to people to support your agenda?

I ask again, if a law isn't enforced, how does it deter people from doing anything?

 

Does he now? I see the article quotes his beliefs on homosexuality in 2009. I see the latest quote is the law and how it will only be used to protect children, non-consenting adults and rape in 2013.

Hmm. Maybe he has "evolved"? There was another politician who recently evolved on gay marriage. Is evolution only a liberal political trait.

 

Here is a context reference as too why I am not so naive when people make such statements:

“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.” - Cuccinelli

Certainly he was talking about those heterosexual couples who are also participating in acts that "don’t comport with natural law".

 

Yes, they are adults who were formed from youngsters. And they are very young adults. 13-18 is not an adult and still they are in the alarming group of kids getting HIV from the new fad that Virginia is stepping up to the plate to deter...

Virginia is against modeling a behavior that is killing kids. Would you want your 13 year old son to get it in his head that "sodomy is the new fun sex"...by example...through marriage...and then come up with HIV before he even enters high school???

Good for Virginia! Kudos! Stepping up to the plate to stave off child death. What more noble cause could there be?

I'd rather ever state err on the side of saving children from dying. Some here would rather promote sodomy as "fun, normal and OK" though...no matter what the cost... You are either with these types of people or agains them. I know where I stand. Do you?

 

If you have evidence of his beliefs having changed, feel free to post it.

 

The law Virginia is considering is a deterrent, not an enforceable one. And what a noble deterrent law it is!

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...boys-ages-13-29-getting-hiv-last-7-years.html

 

I don't want government doing social engineering. If you don't think sodomy is good and want to teach your children that it isn't good, IT IS YOUR JOB. It is not the government's job.

BTW, 18-29 year olds aren't "boys" or "little kids", yet you keep using those words when referring to a study where more than half the age group are adults. You might find people more responsive to your ideas if you stopped LYING like that.

- - - Updated - - -

If a law isn't enforced, HOW IS IT A DETERRENT?

 

So it wouldn't deter you, but this uneforcable law would deter others magically from enaging in oral sex? Don't act dumb? Your telling me to not act dumb?

Not to mention than the fact also that you didn't say 'deter little kids' and you spoke in generalities about uneforceable laws working as deterants, not to mention everyone already knows your BS thread which you've been destroyed in over and over holds no water.

 

I have as much evidence as ThinkProgress. They are putting words into his mouth. This is what they do. Certainly they are taking some of his words. Then they suggest, without direct quotes of what he is thinking.

That's (*)(*)(*)(*)ty reporting and should be disregarded by everyone.

When Obama states, "Trayvon could have been me 35 years ago", anyone who suggests that he cruised neighborhoods looking for White Hispanics to sidewalk bash are ignorant as well.

 

How can any parent go against the tide of sodomy-as-cool? We engineer social standards all the time to model to our children. Sodomy is no exception. Your opinion that kids should die in preference to deterring sodomy is falling on deaf ears.

Yes, we get it, you want sodomy to be the new normal no matter who dies from it. It's just that most folks don't agree with that position; especially when it comes to child death..

 

It isn't. Hence the reason for 11 million illegals in our country.