I was searching a penal code 19.02 for one of my guys and I will explain this in the legal department cause i need some help. :) Well I was reading to see what I could find, which this penal code is not even close to what i was looking for, and this is what i saw, what does this mean?\


While investigating a reported "weapons disturbance," police entered a residence where they observed appellants engaged in deviate sexual intercourse. n1 It is a Class C misdemeanor in the State of Texas for a person to engage "in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex." TEX. PEN. CODE ANN. § 21.06 (Vernon 1994). However, because appellants subsequently entered pleas of nolo contendere, the facts and circumstances of the offense are not in the record. Accordingly, appellants did not challenge at trial, and do not contest on appeal, the propriety of the police conduct leading to their discovery and arrest. Thus, the narrow issue presented here is whether Section 21.06 is facially unconstitutional.

Lulu,

Homosexuality beleive it or not is still illegal in a lot of the US states. Sodomy is the illegal act.

Here is a list of the states where same-sex acts between consenting adults are legal - notice that TX is NOT on the list. Therefore if you were found engaged in any sex act with a person of the same sex you could be charged!

As a note - under the true definition of sodomy - this act IS also practiced in the heterosexual community but you will rarely if ever see a heterosexual couple convicted of this act.

STATES WHERE ALL SAME-SEX ACTS BETWEEN CONSENTING ADULTS ARE LEGAL

(and the year where sodomy laws were struck down)

Alaska 1978
California 1975
Colorado 1971
Connecticut 1969
Delaware 1972
Georgia 1998
Hawaii 1972
Illinois 1961
Indiana 1976
Iowa 1976
Kentucky 1992
Maine 1975
Montana 1997
Nebraska 1977
Nevada 1993
New Hampshire 1973
New Jersey 1975
New Mexico 197?
New York (has been suggested but is waiting on verification)
Ohio 1972
Oregon 1971
Pennsylvania 1983
Rhode Island 1998
South Dakota 1976
Vermont 1977
Washington 1975
Washington, D. C. 1993
West Virginia 1976
Wisconsin 1984
Wyoming 1977

COUNTRIES WHERE LES-BI-GAY
RELATIONSHIPS/SEX ARE LEGAL OR TOLERATED

Australia
Belgium
Brazil
Burkina Faso
Canada
Costa Rica
Denmark
France
Germany
Ghana
Greenland
Guatamala
Haiti
Japan
Luxemburg
Netherlands
New Zealand
Poland
Seychelles
Sweden
Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago (opinion varies)
United Kingdom
USA (varies by state)

I thought that is what it meant, but thought maybe I was reading something more into it.
That is the most crazets poop i have ever heard. They are comparing sodmoy with people being gay? Oh man, I just thought of this, I have a few guys in for sodmoy charge, in fact most of course is in for forcibel sodmoy and i have one that is just sodomy, he said that it was consentual( sp?) on both parties. Do youknow how many years this man got for that?
Man, someone really need to get these laws changed.

Lulu,

It is a sad situation when it comes to the Gay community because 'being gay' alone cannot get you locked up BUT if you 'practice' sexually then you could be charged. So in essence homosexuality is not illegal but in some states most of the sex acts that you would share with your partner are illegal. Go figure...

Below is a recent article from The Daily Texan...

http://www.dailytexanonline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/01/15/3e251b815f221

Resolution calls for repeal of sodomy law
Decision seeks to lift ban on gay sex acts
By Lauren Reinlie (Daily Texan Staff)
January 15, 2003

Student Government voted Tuesday in a 33-1 decision to call for the Texas State Legislature to repeal the Homosexual Conduct Law.
The resolution, authored by Bobby Apperson, the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Ally Affairs Agency SG representative, calls for the repeal of Section 21.06 of the Texas Penal Code which makes acts of anal and oral sex illegal for same sex partners in Texas.

The resolution calls for the University to continue to refrain from using section 21.06 to discriminate against Texans. It also recommends that UT Medical Branch in Galveston should not deny condoms or dental dams to inmates.

Apperson said University Health Services provides safe sex information for same sex and bisexual people, which is technically a violation of the law.

"UHS and any publicly funded health centers could have their materials confiscated in the eyes of the current law," Apperson said. "UHS would be no different if they were distributing information on how to grow marijuana. They are still doing something illegal."

Apperson said 21.06 is used to discriminate against homosexuals because they are considered criminals under Texas law. He said this law is personally affecting him as he begins to apply for jobs.

"I am having to draft two types of resumes," Apperson said. "One is my big gay resumé, and one will have to be toned down because you can be considered a criminal if it is found out that you are gay. The statute is used to make people second class citizens."

Chris Vaca, two-year at-large SG representative, spoke to the assembly about how Section 21.06 affects the student body. He said he was contacted by five professors last semester who were interested in teaching at the University, but rescinded after it was disclosed that the University does not provide domestic partner benefits in part due to Section 21.06.

The resolution states that 35 states and Washington, D.C., have repealed their sodomy laws altogether, and Texas is one of four states where the sodomy laws apply only to homosexuals.

The resolution also states that the statute is used as justification to deny gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals equal access to housing, adoption, employment, health care and education throughout Texas, including housing and health care at the University.

The United States Supreme Court is currently awaiting a hearing on Lawrence and Garner v. Texas, which challenges Section 21.06. Apperson said it is important for the legislation to know that their constituents do not expect the law makers to wait for the Supreme Court decision , which could take years, but instead want section 21.06 to be repealed now.

Apperson plans to hand deliver the resolution to legislators at the Texas State Capitol as well as forward the resolution to President Bush.

Thomas Beard, RTF junior who attended the meeting and spoke during open forum, said he hopes the resolution will serve as a message to Texas legislators.

"I think if any of the legislators listen to their constituency, they should respond to UT students - a group of over 50,000 students from all over the state," he said.

No one spoke in opposition to the resolution at the meeting.

Ashley Rosenthal, a liberal arts representative and the lone dissenter, said she did not have enough information about Section 21.06 to vote for the bill and did not want to abstain.

The resolution was presented at the Dec. 3 SG meeting, which Rosenthal said she had to leave early for academic reasons and therefore did not have time to research the resolution.

Oh, and lulu - In Texas it does not matter if it is consentual or not! Get caught for any reason and you are at risk of being charged - even in your own home that you share with your partner!

That is what that penal code 21 what ever it is said. I dont understand that. I know that I have some guys in for this charge that both consented to it. It is their choice. And let me ask another thing, this is like a little to personal i think, but it is basically the same t hing, or i wold think it would, what happens if a woman and man do it? Or are they just pen pointing Gay's?

Lulu,

In TX it is only Gay men that are affected by this law. A man and a woman can practice these sex acts and not be convicted.

Some other states however the sodomy laws could affect men and women or men and men.

In general however IMO they are just targeting gay men.

well I tell ya, that is plum nuts. I do not see the diffrence between a man and a woman not being targeted cause of sodomy which is what the claim man and man do. That is plum crazy. I guess it has to do with a little prejudice against gay's

Is the case you cited originally (lulu) the one that is heading to the Supreme Court soon? I know something like this went down in Houston a number of years back and I think I heard something about it in the news regarding the SC agreeing to hear it.

Lulu these laws are different in different states. In some, sodomy means any "unatural sex act', which is pretty much anything other than the missionary position so it can include gays, & straights, men & women. In other states it only effects gays, & in some only gay men. Wierd very wierd.

From the case you were describing it seems to me like they admit all the facts of the case are true, but are contesting whether sex acts between 2 consenting adult men can be illegal. The only other thing I could see them trying to fight this on is whether the cops actually had the right to enter the residence.

This is just so very wrong! These were adults in their own home engaged in a natural act. I am sorry, but homosexuality is natural, it occurs in the animal kingdom as well as in humans, that would make it natural, not unnatural. Just my opinion.

Ken, this is not the case I have, or trying to help. I ran across t his trying to find the penal code 19.02, this came up and I was not sure what it meant. I will email you later and try to give you more detail of what I was looking for.
thanks for the info though

lulu I notice the words you used instead of writing that 2 men were having sex and I wonder if you were for this. in other things that you write about and I for one knows how it feels to be rape in jail and for myself it lasted 2 weeks every night to be passed from cel to cell. It was not the people in charged that help but men that were in jail. These men were men that were getting out of jail less than 30 days
Frances

piscescarodine
I am not sure i understand your question. If your asking if i am for rape, no way. What i have placed up top was two men in their own home. That is what I did not understand. Nor did i know that sodomy alone was illegal here.


I am sorry to hear that you were rape while lock up. :(

I alwasy thought that whom ever a person is with, is by choice, rather they have sodomy sex, ect ect. rather it be with man and woman, men and men, ect ect.

i hope this answers your question. If not please feel free to ask.

lulu thank for clearing that up plus I am trying to type and my Cats are all on me
Frances

you are more then welcome, please feel free to ask away :)

It's ether religion based or just of fear of gays! But I don't think they would stop two women of doing that! I think it's just a man domain of fear that of being homosexual or something! The pope is trying to shut down everything about gays and lesbians! So if anyone practice catholic or christianity! Watch out! Cause it's a holy war against Gays and Lesbians! I heard about president bush wanting to abolish gays and lesbians mariages? Will he attack all gays and lesbians and even bis around the world too?! How far does religion has to go to prove a point? To me! If it doesn't cause any harm and is by choice in the partnership! Then why should it be so wrong? As long there is still people straight on earth! They can still make babies and all! But even though I think we still have a pretty big enough popullation! I think people should stop making so many babies! Well, I don't know! I just know that we must not over exagerate the human popullation! Else the planet will just die on us! Or worst! Get rid of us! Things to think about here!

Steph

I FOR ONE UNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION, HOWEVER THAT'S NOT MY REASON FOR REPLYING. JUST THOUGHT I'D LET YOU KNOW YOUR PICTURE IS VERY CUTE!!!

Originally posted by infomus
I heard about president bush wanting to abolish gays and lesbians mariages? Will he attack all gays and lesbians and even bis around the world too?! How far does religion has to go to prove a point? To me! If it doesn't cause any harm and is by choice in the partnership! Then why should it be so wrong? As long there is still people straight on earth! They can still make babies and all!


If marriage is just about making babies, why are sterile people allowed to get married? Or people who don't want children? I don't plan on having children, I plan on adopting IF I ever decide to have a baby. But I was still allowed to get married. How is that fair, Mr. President?

hey, wasn't sodomy legalized a couple months ago? Lulu, what ever happened to your friend who was locked up for that act? i swear it was just legalized all over the US, because i remember back in june everyone here in SF was rejoicing and wearing fun stickers that said "YAY FOR SODOMY" after it was announced. did your friends conviction change at all?

amy underpants

No, not to my knowledge and not in every state in the US where the law currently exists. I think that this will be a long time before we see the disappearance of these laws.

Hey Teb,

You forgot Finland from your list!

Gay and lesbian marriages are here legal too!

And Norway too!

My very good friend fom a childhood got married with her girlfriend last christmas, in church, with chaplain and all things that belongs to wedding.

oh, i remember what it was back in june!! the 2 boyfriends in texas who were on trial for being "caught in the act" of sodomy had their trial thrown out, or whatever that term is. and it was a huge deal in texas because a lot of anti-sodomy supporters throught it was awful, but everyone in SF rejoiced.

yup underpants, i was going to mention that this just recently happened. im GLAD that their trial was thrown out.

everyone has their own sexuality....i think it is a SHAME when higher up people, feel the need to charge ones with a crime, when it is their sexual preference. does that make any sense?
i mean, if they are going to do that, they need to look at EVERYONE, not someone that is homosexual. know what i mean?!? :) its like they are targeting them because of their sexual preference. and that is NOT ok. i hope that this never occurs again, but it probably will. and if it does, i hope it gets thrown out as well.

what if your kissing the same sex?

Good question, someone here might have the answer to it, I surly dont. The whole code puzzles me as it is

As far as I know, kissing is not considered a "sex act", it would be more like "foreplay".

Whether one is against same sex marriage, or even against homosexuality as a whole, it should never have been considered an incarcerable offense. Not ever. Our prisons are bursting at the seams, and they are locking up men who engage in consensual sodomy.

Whatever two consenting adults sexually engage in in the privacy of their home, behind closed doors, in my humble opinion, is no one else's business.

How sad that this is still occurring.

Just in case anyone is still following this thread, and since I didn't see it mentioned except by one person who didn’t specify details, I thought I should make you all aware that the United States Supreme Court heard the case that lulu was referring to and ruled that any sodomy law that treats different people unequally is unconstitutional. Their basic rationale was “pursuit of happiness” and that the state couldn’t show a compelling interest in regulating private behavior of consenting adults.

The court specifically overruled a previous case where it had ruled the other way, concluding that it was wrong in its earlier decision.

Here are the case references, if you’d like to read the opinions:

Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-102) (overruling Bowers)

Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986) (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=US&vol=478&invol=186)