Sodom: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{cleanup | {{cleanup}} | ||
''Sodom''' was an ancient city in the Middle East ' | ''Sodom''' was an ancient city in the Middle East ' |
Revision as of 20:55, 29 July 2022
This article may require cleanup to meet BoyWiki's quality standards. Relevant discussion may be found on the discussion page. |
Sodom' was an ancient city in the Middle East '
History
Sodomy
Sodomy is generally anal ooral sex between people or sexual activity between a person and a non-human animal (bestiality), but it may also mean any non-procreative sexual activity.[1][2][3] Originally, the term sodomy, which is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in the Book of Genesis,[4] was commonly restricted to anal sex.[5][6] Sodomy laws in many countries criminalized the aforementioned behaviors.[6][7] In the Western world, many of these laws have been overturned or are not routinely enforced.
Sodomy laws in 18th-century Europe
An examination of trials for rape and sodomy during the 18th century at the Old Bailey in London shows that the treatment of rape was often lenient, while the treatment of sodomy was often severe. However, the difficulty of proving that penetration and ejaculation had occurred meant that men were often convicted of the lesser charge of 'assault with sodomitical intent', which was not a capital offence.[8]
In France in the 18th century, sodomy was still theoretically a capital crime, and there are a handful of cases where sodomites were executed. However, in several of these, other crimes were involved as well. Records from the Bastille and the police lieutenant d'Argenson, as well as other sources, show that many who were arrested were exiled, sent to a regiment, or imprisoned in places (generally the Hospital) associated with moral crimes such as prostitution. Of these, a number were involved in prostitution or had approached children, or otherwise gone beyond merely having homosexual relations. Ravaisson (a 19th-century writer who edited the Bastille records) suggested that the authorities preferred to handle these cases discreetly, lest public punishments in effect publicize "this vice".[Citation needed]
Periodicals of the time sometimes casually named known sodomites, and at one point even suggested that sodomy was increasingly popular. This does not imply that sodomites necessarily lived in security - specific police agents, for instance, watched the Tuileries, even then a known cruising area. But, as with much sexual behaviour under the Old Regime, discretion was a key concern on all sides (especially since members of prominent families were sometimes implicated) - the law seemed most concerned with those who were the least discreet.[Citation needed]
In 1730, there was a wave of sodomy trials in the Netherlands; some 250 men were summoned before the authorities; 91 faced decrees of exile for not appearing. At least 60 men were sentenced to death.[9]
The last two Englishmen that were hanged for sodomy were executed in 1835. James Pratt and John Smith died in front of Newgate Prison in London on 27 November of that year.[10][11] They had been prosecuted under the Offences against the Person Act 1828, which had replaced the 1533 Buggery Act.
Modern sodomy laws
United States
In the 1950s, all states had some form of law criminalizing sodomy, and in 1986 the United States Supreme Court ruled that nothing in the United States Constitution bars a state from prohibiting sodomy. However, state legislators and state courts had started to repeal or overturn their sodomy laws, beginning with Illinois in 1961, and thus in 2003, only 10 states had laws prohibiting all sodomy, with penalties ranging from 1 to 15 years imprisonment. Additionally, four other states had laws that specifically prohibited same-sex sodomy.
On June 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6–3 decision in Lawrence v. Texas struck down the Texas same-sex sodomy law, ruling that this private sexual conduct is protected by the liberty rights implicit in the due process clause of the United States Constitution, with Sandra Day O'Connor's concurring opinion arguing that they violated equal protection. (See Sodomy law.) This decision invalidated all state sodomy laws insofar as they applied to noncommercial conduct in private between consenting civilians and overruled its 1986 ruling in Bowers v. Hardwick which upheld Georgia's sodomy law.
In the U.S. military, the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals has ruled that the Lawrence v. Texas decision applies to Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the statute banning sodomy. In United States v. Stirewalt:
CRAWFORD, Chief Judge (concurring in part and in the result): I agree with the result in this case but I "would reserve for another day the questions of whether and how Lawrence [v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)] applies to the military. "1 Like United States v. Marcum, "the factual differences between Lawrence and Appellant's case are striking" for the reasons mentioned by the majority as well as the circumstances surrounding the charges themselves.[12]
Stirewalt's conviction of sodomy stood due to the circumstances surrounding the crime. The court went on to say that despite Lawrence's application to the military, Article 125 can still be upheld in cases where there are "factors unique to the military environment" which would place the conduct "outside any protected liberty interest recognized in Lawrence."[13] Examples of such factors could be fraternization, public sexual behavior, or any other factors that would adversely affect good order and discipline. United States v. Meno and United States v. Bullock are two known cases in which consensual sodomy convictions have been overturned in military courts under the Lawrence precedent.[14]
Sodomite
See also
References
- ↑ Shirelle Phelps (2001). World of Criminal Justice: N-Z. Gale Group. p. 686. ISBN 0787650730. https://books.google.com/books?id=izwvAQAAIAAJ&q=World+of+Criminal+Justice:+N-Z.&dq=World+of+Criminal+Justice:+N-Z.&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kx3UUp3gMJGqqQH32YDACw&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAA. Retrieved on January 13, 2014.
- ↑ John Scheb, John Scheb, II (2013). Criminal Law and Procedure. Cengage Learning. p. 185. ISBN 128554613X. https://books.google.com/books?id=VZoWAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA185&dq=&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eB7UUsnOCYqjrgHB9oDADQ&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=&f=false. Retrieved on January 13, 2014.
- ↑ David Newton (2009). Gay and Lesbian Rights: A Reference Handbook, Second Edition. ABC-CLIO. p. 85. ISBN 1598843079. https://books.google.com/books?id=gjcUFK4RZNcC&pg=PA85&dq=&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-xzUUoveD8GbrgGsuIHIDQ&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false. Retrieved on January 13, 2014.
- ↑ J. D. Douglas, Merrill C. Tenney (2011). Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Zondervan. pp. 1584 pages. ISBN 0310492351. https://books.google.com/books?id=8Tq7UcPMwacC&pg=PT3169&dq=&hl=en&sa=X&ei=P3Q-UpHVB4SW2AW_yoH4BA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false. Retrieved on September 21, 2013.
- ↑ Nicholas C. Edsall (2006). Toward Stonewall: Homosexuality and Society in the Modern Western World. University of Virginia Press. pp. 3–4. ISBN 0813925436. https://books.google.com/books?id=0qjwZeKNyh4C&pg=PA3&dq=&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fmY-UrL3K6TC2QXS-YDoBQ&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAjgU#v=onepage&q=&f=false. Retrieved on September 21, 2013.
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 Colin Sumner (2008). The Blackwell Companion to Criminology. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 310–320. ISBN 0470998954. https://books.google.com/books?id=seDrXjekCWwC&pg=PA311&dq=&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cm0-UrmQGsHh2AXAvYHoAg&ved=0CFYQ6AEwCDgK#v=onepage&q=&f=false. Retrieved on September 21, 2013.
- ↑ Andrew Sullivan (March 24, 2003). Unnatural Law. The New Republic. Retrieved on November 27, 2009. “Since the laws had rarely been enforced against heterosexuals, there was no sense of urgency about their repeal.” (Or Sullivan, Andrew (2003-03-24). "Unnatural Law". The New Republic 228 (11).)
- ↑ Crimes tried at the Old Bailey, Proceedings of the Old Bailey online
- ↑ Rictor Norton, The Dutch Purge of Homosexuals 1730
- ↑ See
- ↑ Alternative date April 8, 1835 seen 2012 Archived November 20, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
- ↑ U.S. v. Stirewalt
- ↑ U.S. v. Marcum
- ↑ United States v. Meno, United States Court of Criminal Appeals Archived 2008-02-27 at the Wayback Machine