By the very definiton rape would be sodomy wouldn't it? Deviant sexual activity.

 

I wouldn't say so. I would draw a distinction between "deviate" and "forced." "Deviate" I would take to mean as a departure in manner, though with full consent of the other party a possibility. Rape on the other hand need not be a departure in manner, but a difference of consent.

Look at the definitions here for Kentucky.

 

Thanks HHSDad. When in doubt, look at the law. You'd think I'd have learned that by now.

Sodomy in the 1st-3rd degree all deal with forced, underage or guardian sodomy and are all felonies. Sodomy in the 4th degree is a misdemeanor. And I have personally seen someone get an additional 5 years added on for Sodemy in the 1st degree.

 

And they should be.

That's very interesting. It means courts are making a distinction and saying this sort of sexual conduct is more offensive or more terrible than another kind. I had no idea. Lawrence v. Texas hinged on privacy grounds, so it could probably be avoided in this situation. Would a jurist basically argue that sodomy itself isn't illegal, but that forcible sodomy is worse than, for lack of a better term, "normal" rape?

I'm not totally positive. I just know that the only time I have seen someone charged with sodomy is during a rape trial. When asked I was told that the charges were levied to seek out more years.

 

In all honesty, the sodomy I was referring to in my original question was consenting sodomy. Forced sodomy is a whole other topic and I don't think it's near as interesting as I would assume most people would be for laws against any type of forced sexual acts.

I wouldn't say so. I would draw a distinction between "deviate" and "forced." "Deviate" I would take to mean as a departure in manner, though with full consent of the other party a possibility. Rape on the other hand need not be a departure in manner, but a difference of consent.

 

I agree. What I meant was is wouldn't forced sexual activity be deviate activity and therefore by definition be sodomy? I'm all for using every bit of legal weight that can be brought to bear on rapists as I consider it one of the most repugnant crimes there is.

In all honesty, the sodomy I was referring to in my original question was consenting sodomy. Forced sodomy is a whole other topic and I don't think it's near as interesting as I would assume most people would be for laws against any type of forced sexual acts.

 

I figured as much and I think that's what we've come to, so like I said at the outset, I think consensual sodomy laws were tossed out by Lawrence v. Texas, even though some may still be on the books.

I do not believe sodomy should be a crime unless it is forced...aka rape.

I figured as much and I think that's what we've come to, so like I said at the outset, I think consensual sodomy laws were tossed out by Lawrence v. Texas, even though some may still be on the books.

:thumb: :thumb:

I agree. What I meant was is wouldn't forced sexual activity be deviate activity and therefore by definition be sodomy? I'm all for using every bit of legal weight that can be brought to bear of rapists.

 

Well now that HHSDad has pointed us all in the direction of the Kentucky law on the subject, deviate sexual activity has a very specific legal definition and so not all rape would fall into it. In fact, I'd think most rape doesn't.

It looks like Sodomy in the 4th degree was overturned by the Ky Supreme Court in 1992 in Commonwealth v. Wasson.

It looks like Sodomy in the 4th degree was overturned by the Ky Supreme Court in 1992 in Commonwealth v. Wasson.

 

:thumb:

The sodomy law as written in KRS is a good law. It doesn’t need to be changed. Fourth degree sodomy was the thing people had a problem with and it has been repealed.

Many states feel that enforcing sodomy laws can be a pain in the butt.

Many states feel that enforcing sodomy laws can be a pain in the butt.

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

While it's not my cup of tea, I don't think that is should be illegal, if both parties consent.