Sodomy Laws Research Articles

Moral sensitivity, sodomy laws, and traumatic brain injury rehabilitation

Moral sensitivity, sodomy laws, and traumatic brain injury rehabilitation

Gays/Justice: A Study of Ethics, Society and Law

Richard Mohr's book is a work of moral and political philosophy, and not of law.' Were it otherwise, the book could not bear the title that it does: gays and justice are more often counterposed than juxtaposed in the legal system. As the book (p. 316), recent scholarship,2 and the courts3 all attest, the law generally has viewed homosexuals as entitled only to condemnation and not to justice if by justice we mean an impartial application of neutral principles of fairness. Gay men and lesbians4 have been viewed not as equal citizens with the same rights to the pursuit of happiness as their heterosexual siblings, but as objects of disgust.5 As Mohr puts it, sodomy laws are the chief systematic way that society as a whole tells gays they are scum (p. 60). But if morality has been employed as a sword against homosexuals, and brandished as a license for their persecution, Mohr's achievement is to have fashioned a moral shield, and to have turned the sword on its wielders. In Gays/Justice he advances a cascade of arguments that morally should compel us to respond not only by removing legislated sanctions, but also by affirmatively protecting the rights of gay men and lesbians to live as free citizens in honesty and without shame. Appealing to overarching concepts of consistency, fairness, utility, and human dignity, Mohr attempts to tackle the morality-mongers at their own game. Mohr does recognize that much of the moral opposition to homosexuality is grounded not in principles susceptible to argument, but in dogmatic religious conviction. Mohr's own pessimism about the anti-

Regional Differences in Sodomy Laws

As of 1989, 24 states prohibited either heterosexual or homosexual sodomy. This raises for study the following question: in what ways do states with sodomy laws differ from states without sodomy laws. It was hypothesized that states with sodomy laws are more punitive (as measured by the rate of adults under correctional supervision and the number of restricted civil rights for a felony conviction), rural, and southern. Although the first two hypotheses were rejected, states with sodomy laws scored significantly higher than states without such laws on Gastil's Index of Southerness. Sodomy laws may be more commonly found in the South given regional differences in social values about sex, morality, and family life.

REGIONAL DIFFERENCES IN SODOMY LAWS

As of 1989, 24 states prohibited either heterosexual or homosexual sodomy. This raises for study the following question: in what ways do states with sodomy laws differ from states without sodomy laws. It was hypothesized that states with sodomy laws are more punitive (as measured by the rate of adults under correctional supervision and the number of restricted civil rights for a felony conviction), rural, and southern. Although the first two hypotheses were rejected, states with sodomy laws scored significantly higher than states without such laws on Gastil's Index of Southernness. Sodomy laws may be more commonly found in the South given regional differences in social values about sex, morality, and family life.

DOES THE THREAT OF AIDS CREATE DIFFICULTIES FOR LORD DEVLIN'S CRITICS?

Although over twenty years have passed since the Hart‐Devlin exchange, the controversy over society's right to punish homosexuals remains alive, as is shown by recent concern over the spread of AIDS and the recent announcement of the Supreme Court that “majority sentiments about the morality of homosexuality” constitute an adequate justification for sodomy statutes under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment.1 Lord Devlin's moral justification for punishing homosexual conduct seems to follow a similar line of reasoning. The one argument to which his critics have paid the most attention begins with the assertion that society consists of a seamless web of ideas and values, the content of which is determined by whether the ordinary, reasonable person is disgusted by a particular type of conduct.2 Among the types of conduct that disgust the ordinary person, he continues, is homosexual conduct.3 Therefore, Devlin concludes, society may punish homosexual conduct, even if it is consensual.

Moral Argument and Liberal Toleration: Abortion and Homosexuality

In a similar way, arguments against antiabortion and antisodomy laws take two different forms: Some say the laws are unjust because the practices they prohibit are morally permissible, indeed sometimes desirable; others oppose these laws without reference to the moral status of the practices at issue, and argue instead that individuals have a right to choose for themselves whether to engage in them. These two styles of argument might be called, respectively, the and the sophisticated. The naive view holds that the justice of laws depends on the moral worth of the conduct they prohibit or protect. The sophisticated view holds that the justice of such laws depends not on a substantive moral judgment about the conduct at stake, but instead on a more general theory about the respective claims of majority rule and individual rights, of democracy on the one hand, and liberty on the other.

Cruel and Unusual Punishment and Sodomy Statutes: The Breakdown of the Solem v Helm Test

Cruel and Unusual Punishment and Sodomy Statutes: The Breakdown of the Solem v Helm Test

The Miscegenation Analogy: Sodomy Law as Sex Discrimination

This paper argues that laws that criminalize homosexual sex are unconstitutional sex discrimination. This student note first made the argument, accepted decades later by the Supreme Court in Bostock v. Clayton County, that discrimination against gay people is necessarily illegal sex discrimination.

The Dutch penal law and homosexual conduct.

The history of changes in Dutch penal law regulating homosexual conduct since the 18th century are traced and their effects on homosexual behavior described. Changes in policies and practices regarding enforcement are reviewed. The article discusses the Dutch criminal code of 1886, the criminalization of homosexual contacts involving minors in 1911, the criminalization of male homosexuality from 1941 to 1945, and the progressive relaxation of the law since World War II, resulting in the decriminalization in 1971 of homosexual contacts involving minors and the draft in 1981 for a bill that would prohibit discrimination against homosexuals.

Morality and the Health of the Body Politic

Although acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) is clearly a public health threat, Beauchamp contends that the view that it is also a threat to the majority's values is a form of potentially counterproductive legal moralism. Social discrimination against homosexuals both directly threatens the health of homosexuals and impedes changes in their sexual practices that could lessen the risk of transmitting AIDS. Sodomy statutes contribute to the poor health of homosexuals by discouraging them from seeking treatment for sexually transmitted diseases. Success in the battle against AIDS depends on replacing old images of the tightly bound community based on sodomy statutes with a complex public health policy that combines the right to be different with the view that, in matters of the common health and safety, we are "one body" with a common good.

CALL FROM EXHIBITION CATALOGS COMMITTEE

Previous articleNext article No AccessCALL FROM EXHIBITION CATALOGS COMMITTEEConnie KoppelmanConnie Koppelman Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Volume 4, Number 6OCTOBER 1976 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/arlisnanews.4.6.27945700 Views: 1Total views on this site Citations: 1Citations are reported from Crossref Journal History This article was published in the ARLIS/NA Newsletter (1972-1981), which is continued by Art Documentation (1982-present). Copyright © 1976 ARLIS/NORTH AMERICAPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Shashank P. Kumar Tightening the Noose Around Anti-Sodomy Laws: Global and Local Perspectives On Human Rights and Homosexuals, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2009).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1348146