Mass. Court: Gay Civil Unions Not Enough

[ceo_pte]

The only problem with the whole thing is that you have these stupid gays that will take it too far. I say give them the state of mass and then drop a nice big bomb on it. Take care of most of our problems. J/k

The problem is that you have the Federal Courts ruling on certain cases and they, in fact, are creating laws by how they decide. The courts are not suppose to make the laws, only enforce them. But then you have some j/a of a lawyer that will use that as a precedent for a previous case and then before you know it we have a law saying it's ok to kill babies. Roe vs. Wade.

That's why we need a constitutional amendment. To maintain the moral values of this country. No wonder kids think it's alright to kill each other. They have no morals. If you get too far away from good morals this country will crumble. It's happening everyday and thank God we have a President with Good Morals who will pass an amendment defining marriage and pass a ban on Abortions.

 

[hwyman3]

Originally posted by Ken King
Why would the law have to be rewritten? As it stands now the law says, "A person may not commit adultery." As I understand adultery, it is having sexual intercourse with someone other then your spouse. So this law should still work.

The law would have to be rewritten because in Maryland the sexual intercourse MUST occur between a man and a woman. Any sexual act between partners of the same sex does not constitute adulty in Maryland. The way the law is written it is very specific on what adultry is. It must be actual intercourse between a man and a woman who is not either's spouse. Oral sex between a man and a woman does not qualify as adultry according to the laws of Maryland. Even if homosexual marriages are not allowed in Maryland, the law should still be rewritten so that includes any sexual act.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by hwyman3
The law would have to be rewritten because in Maryland the sexual intercourse MUST occur between a man and a woman. Any sexual act between partners of the same sex does not constitute adulty in Maryland. The way the law is written it is very specific on what adultry is. It must be actual intercourse between a man and a woman who is not either's spouse. Oral sex between a man and a woman does not qualify as adultry according to the laws of Maryland. Even if homosexual marriages are not allowed in Maryland, the law should still be rewritten so that includes any sexual act.

Okay, you’re going to have to cite the reference for the definition that you claim as needing to be re-written. My understanding of adultery is that it is voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband. Sexual intercourse is defined as either heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis or intercourse involving genital contact between individuals other than penetration of the vagina by the penis.

 

[Tonio]

Originally posted by Ken King
Okay, you’re going to have to cite the reference for the definition that you claim as needing to be re-written. My understanding of adultery is that it is voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband. Sexual intercourse is defined as either heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis or intercourse involving genital contact between individuals other than penetration of the vagina by the penis.

Isn't this discussion a little too much like high school Sex Ed? I think it misses the point. Does a state or the federal government have a compelling interest in regulating consensual sexual behavior between adults? I don't think so.

 

[hwyman3]

Originally posted by Ken King
Okay, you’re going to have to cite the reference for the definition that you claim as needing to be re-written. My understanding of adultery is that it is voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband. Sexual intercourse is defined as either heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis or intercourse involving genital contact between individuals other than penetration of the vagina by the penis.

Most normal people would agree with your definition of adultery. However, the law in Maryland does not. Here is Maryland's law:

"Adultery is sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than the spouse. In Maryland, neither cunnilingus nor fellatio, which the law defines as sodomy, is a ground for divorce and generally neither is considered adultery. The sexual intercourse must involve some penetration of the female organ by the male organ, but a "completion" of the sexual intercourse is not required."

You can find this at:
http://www.marylandlawonline.com/md/family/divexpln.htm#11. Under the states definition of adultery, homosexual marriage would not be held to the same standard as a hetrosexual marriage. That is why the law would need to be changed.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by hwyman3
Most normal people would agree with your definition of adultery. However, the law in Maryland does not. Here is Maryland's law:

"Adultery is sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than the spouse. In Maryland, neither cunnilingus nor fellatio, which the law defines as sodomy, is a ground for divorce and generally neither is considered adultery. The sexual intercourse must involve some penetration of the female organ by the male organ, but a "completion" of the sexual intercourse is not required."

You can find this at:
http://www.marylandlawonline.com/md/family/divexpln.htm#11. Under the states definition of adultery, homosexual marriage would not be held to the same standard as a hetrosexual marriage. That is why the law would need to be changed.

Okay, I see where you are getting this from, did you read what they have at the top of the page.

“This section explains the subject of divorce law in Maryland. It is designed to provide general legal information and is not a substitute for legal advice provided by an attorney who is a member of the Maryland Bar. However, if your divorce is uncontested, (there are no conflicts concerning child custody, child support, alimony, or martial property,) you should be able to represent yourself as a pro se litigant, using the Domestic Relations Pro Se Forms that are available at this web site.”

I’m talking about the actual statute. Recognition of same-sex couples and the implied sexual relations conducted by those couples would result in a reasonable modification of the definition of sexual intercourse. The statute is written broad specifically to contend with this by simply stating that sex beyond spousal partners is illegal. The result would be that there would be no rewrite of the statute, just a broadening of a definition that could reasonably be established by the court.

 

[hwyman3]

Originally posted by Ken King
Okay, I see where you are getting this from, did you read what they have at the top of the page.

“This section explains the subject of divorce law in Maryland. It is designed to provide general legal information and is not a substitute for legal advice provided by an attorney who is a member of the Maryland Bar. However, if your divorce is uncontested, (there are no conflicts concerning child custody, child support, alimony, or martial property,) you should be able to represent yourself as a pro se litigant, using the Domestic Relations Pro Se Forms that are available at this web site.”

I’m talking about the actual statute. Recognition of same-sex couples and the implied sexual relations conducted by those couples would result in a reasonable modification of the definition of sexual intercourse. The statute is written broad specifically to contend with this by simply stating that sex beyond spousal partners is illegal. The result would be that there would be no rewrite of the statute, just a broadening of a definition that could reasonably be established by the court.

The problem is that in Maryland the president has already been established that adultery must take place between a man and a woman. All other sexual acts have been defined under sodemy laws, which have been overturned by the US Supreme Court. Therefore, adultry can only be committed by members of the opposite sex. If Adultery can only occur between members of the opposite sex, how then can adultery occur in a homosexual relationship? Why should a standard that applies to hetrosexual couples not also be applied to a homosexual relationship? I have confirmed this with divorce lawyers that a homosexual relationship does not constitute adultery. Under the definition I posted earlier states that for adultery to occur, the male organ must penetrate the female organ, how can that occur in a homosexual relationship?

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by hwyman3
The problem is that in Maryland the president has already been established that adultery must take place between a man and a woman. All other sexual acts have been defined under sodemy laws, which have been overturned by the US Supreme Court. Therefore, adultry can only be committed by members of the opposite sex. If Adultery can only occur between members of the opposite sex, how then can adultery occur in a homosexual relationship? Why should a standard that applies to hetrosexual couples not also be applied to a homosexual relationship? I have confirmed this with divorce lawyers that a homosexual relationship does not constitute adultery. Under the definition I posted earlier states that for adultery to occur, the male organ must penetrate the female organ, how can that occur in a homosexual relationship?

As this is all in the hypothetical as far as Maryland is concerned it isn't really relevant. In Maryland the law states that only a man and a woman can be married. Now, should the law change to allow for same-sex marriage, the existing precedent would not be applicable and this would be a question for the judicial system to address short of a new piece of legislation, which is unnecessary based on the broadness of the existing law.

You have made assumptions that have no basis in law or fact and you can talk to as many divorce lawyers as you want about it. Adultery is a criminal offense (that happens to be a grounds for divorce) and as such it would be a question for the jury to decide as to whether or not there are conditions under which a person in a same-sex marriage might be charged with that crime. Also re-read the definition you talk about, it has that major clarifier “generally” contained in it that means that this isn’t always the case.

 

[hwyman3]

Originally posted by Ken King
As this is all in the hypothetical as far as Maryland is concerned it isn't really relevant. In Maryland the law states that only a man and a woman can be married. Now, should the law change to allow for same-sex marriage, the existing precedent would not be applicable and this would be a question for the judicial system to address short of a new piece of legislation, which is unnecessary based on the broadness of the existing law.

You have made assumptions that have no basis in law or fact and you can talk to as many divorce lawyers as you want about it. Adultery is a criminal offense (that happens to be a grounds for divorce) and as such it would be a question for the jury to decide as to whether or not there are conditions under which a person in a same-sex marriage might be charged with that crime. Also re-read the definition you talk about, it has that major clarifier “generally” contained in it that means that this isn’t always the case.

So I guess court precidents are not factual or bave no basis in law? This is the way the courts have ruled in the past. The reason this precident is never challenged is that a no fault divorce in Maryland takes 1 year. To challenge the curent precident, would take longer to go through the courts and cost more money than just filing a voluntary separation divorce.

The one question you won't answer I've noticed is how can adultery take place when to satisfy the definition, requires a man and a woman. By definition, (since the actual statute requires penetration of the female organ by the male organ) how can a homosexual relationship be adultery? You are appling your own standard to what defines adultery. That's fine, I actually agree with you. However, the laws of Maryland do not. That is why the law needs to be changed. I think we can all agree taht if your spouse has any type of sexual relations outside of the marriage, that would constitute adultery. All I'm saying is the law in Maryland should reflect what the people feel is adultery. When the adultery law was written, homosexual acts were covered under sodemy laws. Recently, the United States Supreme Court overturned sodemy laws. The law in Maryland is just behind the times and should be updated.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by hwyman3
So I guess court precidents are not factual or bave no basis in law? This is the way the courts have ruled in the past. The reason this precident is never challenged is that a no fault divorce in Maryland takes 1 year. To challenge the curent precident, would take longer to go through the courts and cost more money than just filing a voluntary separation divorce.

The one question you won't answer I've noticed is how can adultery take place when to satisfy the definition, requires a man and a woman. By definition, (since the actual statute requires penetration of the female organ by the male organ) how can a homosexual relationship be adultery? You are appling your own standard to what defines adultery. That's fine, I actually agree with you. However, the laws of Maryland do not. That is why the law needs to be changed. I think we can all agree taht if your spouse has any type of sexual relations outside of the marriage, that would constitute adultery. All I'm saying is the law in Maryland should reflect what the people feel is adultery. When the adultery law was written, homosexual acts were covered under sodemy laws. Recently, the United States Supreme Court overturned sodemy laws. The law in Maryland is just behind the times and should be updated.

There is no precedent because there are no same-sex marriages in Maryland. Do you having difficulty understanding that? Additionally, you are trying to merge a civil action (divorce) with a criminal act (adultery). They are separate and only related if carried through to a divorce. In Maryland, adultery qualifies for an immediate and absolute divorce because a crime was committed. There is no waiting time and it would certainly be an “at fault” divorce.

You have failed to show the “legal” definition. All you have provided is what a commercial site has offered as their definition and they even clarify it with the term “generally” (meaning that there might be other acts that could qualify as well) and a bigger clarification stating that their information should not be substituted for the actual law or legal advice. Now show me exactly where in the Annotated Code of Maryland the definition is that you claim. I’ll give you a hint; you won’t find it, as it does not exist.

As to applying my own standard to this hypothetical issue, I am sure that if same-sex marriages were eventually allowed in this state that the acts considered as adulterous would be modified to include same-sex behaviors without requiring them to be specifically enumerated as you seem to believe is required.

 

[hwyman3]

Originally posted by Ken King
There is no precedent because there are no same-sex marriages in Maryland. Do you having difficulty understanding that? Additionally, you are trying to merge a civil action (divorce) with a criminal act (adultery). They are separate and only related if carried through to a divorce. In Maryland, adultery qualifies for an immediate and absolute divorce because a crime was committed. There is no waiting time and it would certainly be an “at fault” divorce.

You have failed to show the “legal” definition. All you have provided is what a commercial site has offered as their definition and they even clarify it with the term “generally” (meaning that there might be other acts that could qualify as well) and a bigger clarification stating that their information should not be substituted for the actual law or legal advice. Now show me exactly where in the Annotated Code of Maryland the definition is that you claim. I’ll give you a hint; you won’t find it, as it does not exist.

As to applying my own standard to this hypothetical issue, I am sure that if same-sex marriages were eventually allowed in this state that the acts considered as adulterous would be modified to include same-sex behaviors without requiring them to be specifically enumerated as you seem to believe is required.

The precedent has been set in Maryland. You do not need to have same sex marriages for this precedent to be set. Here is a hypthetical situation. Man and woman are married. One of them has a homosexual affair and the couple is going to divorce. According to your definition (and mine) this is the same as if the affair had been hetrosexual, yet because Maryland law does not consider homosexual activities to be adultery, this couple cannot file for immediate dicvorce. Think it doesn't happen? It happens every day.

The problem with the law in Maryland is that it is too specific. I have not asked that they specifically enumerate activities. All I said was it should constitute any sexual act by a married person with someone other than their spouse. The law already enumerates and defines very specifically what constitutes adultery.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by hwyman3
The precedent has been set in Maryland. You do not need to have same sex marriages for this precedent to be set. Here is a hypthetical situation. Man and woman are married. One of them has a homosexual affair and the couple is going to divorce. According to your definition (and mine) this is the same as if the affair had been hetrosexual, yet because Maryland law does not consider homosexual activities to be adultery, this couple cannot file for immediate dicvorce. Think it doesn't happen? It happens every day.

The problem with the law in Maryland is that it is too specific. I have not asked that they specifically enumerate activities. All I said was it should constitute any sexual act by a married person with someone other than their spouse. The law already enumerates and defines very specifically what constitutes adultery.

How is it specific? Here is the law as it stands.
§ 10-501. Adultery.
(a) Prohibited. - A person may not commit adultery.
(b) Penalty. - A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction shall be fined $10.
[An. Code 1957, art. 27, § 3; 2002, ch. 26, § 2.]


Now you can search the statutes high and low and nowhere will you find a definition for adultery. Did they know that it would change with times when they first developed the law? Refer to the closest dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and you find adultery to be defined as;

Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband.

An attorney with any skill could argue the more contemporary societal climate to demand a question for the jury as to what constitutes “sexual intercourse”. If denied it could be advanced to a higher court. But remember that adultery is the criminal charge. Rarely is anyone charged criminally for this crime. That is why there have been no new or contemporary decisions on this matter.

If the state makes same-sex marriages legal then the divorce laws will have to be applied equally requiring a re-write of many Family Law statutes anyway. But the criminal act of adultery can stand as it is. So I guess I still can’t see your problem when you said, “If we change the law to allow homosexual marriage, then we must also change other laws, such as the adultry laws in Maryland.”

 

[rebeka]

Originally posted by hwyman3

"Adultery is sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than the spouse. In Maryland, neither cunnilingus nor fellatio, which the law defines as sodomy, is a ground for divorce and generally neither is considered adultery. The sexual intercourse must involve some penetration of the female organ by the male organ, but a "completion" of the sexual intercourse is not required."

Ya gotta like this version, though. It allows us to do a 69 on every redneck pool table in St. Mary's county (for a concenting crowd of course) and be video taped, and still have a year to talk the spouse out of the divorce.
I guess I won't be needing this link: http://forums.somd.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22571