Michigan Senate Passes Animal Cruelty Bill Which Includes Sodomy Ban

[bobzilla]

If you need more than one, you might have a problem.

 

[nsheepdog]

I would feel much safer, being a man in Michigan with this law on the books.

 

[HoughMade]

The main reason for the topic as stated in the post is WHY in the name of all that's blessed by the constitution. Would a Republican tag this on as a rider to a bill. He needs to go back to what ever church he crawled out from under and tell his fellow congregants that he is an idiot and cannot uphold his oath of office because he would prefer to rule america as the holey roman empire. And like the church of old send forth edicts from the pulpit to rule the masses.

If your going to hold office you need to set aside your public religious belief's and do the work of the people and keep your religion where it belongs in your head, your heart and your home where it belongs. Not trying to cram it in to unconstitutional laws

Clearly, you don't understand what went on here.

Are you talking about when this language was actually​ added to the law in 1931?

 

[BADWOLF]

Clearly, you don't understand what went on here.

Are you talking about when this language was actually​ added to the law in 1931?

Senate bill 219 was passed in 1931?

I'm saying Rick Jones needs to be smacked around a bit and change up his word game in the current bill.

 

[MisterChester]

Indiana has lax sodomy laws so all these prostitutes from Michigan go to Indiana for their business.

 

[HoughMade]

Senate bill 219 was passed in 1931?

I'm saying Rick Jones needs to be smacked around a bit and change up his word game in the current bill.

Senate Bill 219 added nothing regarding sodomy between people to the law. It just didn't remove what had been there for over 80 years...and what hasn't been enforced since who knows when.

 

[Expat]

Senate Bill 219 added nothing regarding sodomy between people to the law. It just didn't remove what had been there for over 80 years...and what hasn't been enforced since who knows when.

You're just confusing them with facts that go against what they want to believe.

 

[Birds Away]

You're just confusing them with facts that go against what they want to believe.

I hate it when he does that.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Senate Bill 219 added nothing regarding sodomy between people to the law. It just didn't remove what had been there for over 80 years...and what hasn't been enforced since who knows when.

So, if I have this right:

1. Michigan had an existing criminal sodomy statute (as did Indiana until 1977) which was never enforced.

2. Michigan recriminalizes bestiality (as did Indiana).

3. There is some strange free-floating language left over by a staff attorney during the 17th rewrite that the True Guardians of Liberty fixate on.

4. Michigan removes the strange free-floating language.

5. Everyone overreacts and claims this is a blow (yes, yes I did) against Liberty.

Do I have it right?

 

[HoughMade]

So, if I have this right:

1. Michigan had an existing criminal sodomy statute (as did Indiana until 1977) which was never enforced.

2. Michigan recriminalizes bestiality (as did Indiana).

3. There is some strange free-floating language left over by a staff attorney during the 17th rewrite that the True Guardians of Liberty fixate on.

4. Michigan removes the strange free-floating language.

5. Everyone overreacts and claims this is a blow (yes, yes I did) against Liberty.

Do I have it right?

Close....very close.

I would have gone with the less genteel: "freedom took it in the *** ", but basically you're right.

 

[BugI02]

EDC with obligatory "ring of safety".

View attachment 44988

"Put a helmet on that soldier" lol

 

[Expat]

Close....very close.

I would have gone with the less gentile: "freedom took it in the ***", but basically you're right.

genteel?

 

[HoughMade]

genteel?

Now that's a funny typo.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Close....very close.

I would have gone with the less gentile: "freedom took it in the ***", but basically you're right.

I anticipate that phrase when INGO has a duplicate thread on this tempest in a teapot this weekend.

have gone with the less gentile

Oy, veh. The goys always ruin the fun.

 

[HoughMade]

I anticipate that phrase when INGO has a duplicate thread on this tempest in a teapot this weekend.

I neglected to take the opportunity to refer to the Model Penal Code (OK, for fun, the "Model Penile Code") which, as you indicated, when adopted by Indiana in 1977, did away with "sodomy" which included bestiality under the common law....and rejoicing was heard all over Newton County.

Several years ago when they were adding bestiality back as a crime in Illinois (having lost it due to the adoption of the Model Penile Code, like Indiana...and rejoicing was heard all over Kankakee), Roe and Gary (yes that long ago) were discussing it on the radio and I called in to explain how they had inadvertently (?) made it legal...and while I was on the phone, sitting in my office, i leaned back and fell over in my chair...and continued the conversation as though nothing had happened.

...good times, good times.

 

[JTScribe]

Close....very close.

I would have gone with the less genteel: "freedom took it in the *** ", but basically you're right.

Your posts need to come with a keyboard-spray trigger warning.

I am offended, sir, and my hands are soaked with Diet Pepsi!

 

[Expat]

Now that's a funny typo.

Especially with the turn in the Ted Nugent thread.

 

[HoughMade]

Especially with the turn in the Ted Nugent thread.

I guess the truly less gentile version would have been: "freedom took a putz in the tuchus."

 

[DRob]

The year is 1967 and DRob is hired by IPD. He, and his recruit classmates, are issued a 3 ring binder titled Criminal Law for Indiana Police Officers. There is a crime listed in that binder called Sodomy with partial wording as follows, "Whoever commits that detestable crime against nature with either man or beast is guilty of sodomy". Each listed crime included the essential elements (what you had to prove to get a conviction) as well as any related court opinions. I distinctly remember one of those court decisions was "A chicken is a beast as defined under this statute". Sorry I can't provide the specific case. I wonder who would have been called to testify on behalf of nature!

 

[BehindBlueI's]

The year is 1967 and DRob is hired by IPD. He, and his recruit classmates, are issued a 3 ring binder titled Criminal Law for Indiana Police Officers. There is a crime listed in that binder called Sodomy with partial wording as follows, "Whoever commits that detestable crime against nature with either man or beast is guilty of sodomy". Each listed crime included the essential elements (what you had to prove to get a conviction) as well as any related court opinions. I distinctly remember one of those court decisions was "A chicken is a beast as defined under this statute". Sorry I can't provide the specific case. I wonder who would have been called to testify on behalf of nature!

Cluck all that.