Talk:Crime against nature

Untitled
Changed NC reference to specific statute rather than chapter, which deals with other topics as well. Xrlq (talk) 03:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Added Mississippi, and missing cites and links to other state law where available. And added "arguably" to the statement that they are considered crimes, as Lawrence v. Texas sharply limits their effect, at a minimum. Added "buggery" to the "see also" list, as that is the term used in South Carolina's statute, which otherwise reads identically to a typical "crime against nature" statute.

Cops TV show
It's funny watching them arrest people for this on the Cops TV show when they're going to go home and do the same thing with their girlfriend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinrobin (talk • contribs) 23:55, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Polygamy
I'm sorry to anybody who believes in this horrid and sexist crime, but fossil evidence shows that early humans like Homo erectus proves that Humans are not naturally polygamous.--65.96.242.22 (talk) 21:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

this is ridiculous. it seems dubious that fossils from millions of years ago could prove or disprove that our non-human ancestors practiced polygamy, and whether or not they did wouldn't tell us anything whatsoever about the "naturalness" polygamy for humans.

our closest existing relatives, the only ones whose actual behavior we can observe, have different sexual practices, orangutans and gorillas practicing something that very much resembles polygamy, while bonobos are indiscriminately promiscuous.

my point is that different species have different patterns of behavior, so appeals to the supposed practices of our nonhuman ancestors really offers us no useful information about how we should behave or what's "natural" for us.

(and in fact the term natural, in this context, has a teleogical meaning rather than a behavioral one in regard to other animals. polygamy certain fulfills the telos, the biological purpose and goal, of sex, i.e. reproduction.)

cultural anthropologists found that 75 to 80% of actual human societies and cultures studied allow or allowed polygamy, including, historically, Judaism. the Bible tells us that Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines, after all.

however, the main article is about "crimes against nature," a legal and ethical concept which does not and has not included polygamy among the categories of behaviors included in the concept, just as it didn't include adultery and premarital sex even in places and during times where and when those things were illegal.

14:52, 5 January 2014 (UTC) Michael Christian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.63.222 (talk)

Origin of term
From the article: "Crime against nature" is a legal term used in published cases in the United States since 1814.[2]

The reference shows that the term was used in 1814, but not that this was the first use. In fact, it was mentioned in Blackstone's Commentaries, Book 4, Chapter 15, Section 4, referring to homosexuality or bestiality:


 * [...] another offence of a still deeper malignity,—the infamous crime against nature, committed either with man or beast; a crime which ought to be strictly and impartially proved, and then as strictly and impartially punished. [...]
 * This the voice of nature and of reason and the express law of God determined to be capital. Of which we have a signal instance long before the Jewish dispensation by the destruction of two cities by fire from heaven; so that this is a universal, not merely a provincial, recept. And our antient law in some degree imitated this punishment, by commanding such miscreants to be burned to death, though Fleta says they should be buried alive; either of which punishments was indifferently used for this crime among the antient Goths. But now the general punishment of all felonies is the same, namely, by hanging; and this offence (being in the times of popery only subject to  ecclesiastical censures) was made felony without benefit of clergy by statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 6, revived and confirmed by 5 Eliz. c. 17. And the rule of law herein is, that if both are arrived at years of discretion, agentes et consentientes pari pœna plectantur.
 * This the voice of nature and of reason and the express law of God determined to be capital. Of which we have a signal instance long before the Jewish dispensation by the destruction of two cities by fire from heaven; so that this is a universal, not merely a provincial, recept. And our antient law in some degree imitated this punishment, by commanding such miscreants to be burned to death, though Fleta says they should be buried alive; either of which punishments was indifferently used for this crime among the antient Goths. But now the general punishment of all felonies is the same, namely, by hanging; and this offence (being in the times of popery only subject to  ecclesiastical censures) was made felony without benefit of clergy by statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 6, revived and confirmed by 5 Eliz. c. 17. And the rule of law herein is, that if both are arrived at years of discretion, agentes et consentientes pari pœna plectantur.

Maybe the article should say the "crime against nature" was a crime in English law and some of its derivatives. Count Truthstein (talk) 18:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Extent of term
I will remove this sentence from the article: "Other examples include heterosexual and homosexual fellatio and cunnilingus, other non-procreative sexual practices, or procreative sexual acts in the wrong position or without procreative intent, even between married couples." The reference at mentions what theologians thought of as unnatural acts, but not was indictable in the law courts specifically as "a crime against nature". Also, I'm not sure if male-on-female anal sex was included in this term. Blackstone is not clear: the expression "man or beast" could include women. Count Truthstein (talk) 09:15, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

but the law clearly included same-sex sex acts among unnatural acts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.63.222 (talk) 15:06, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

unnatural
"Despite the legal phrasing of "against nature" and "unnatural," homosexual behaviour have been found to occur naturally in numerous examples of non-human animals." Whoever inserted that did not understand or deliberately ignored what the term "unnatural" means in that context. It's about the teleological use not the ontological one, which is what the writer was doing. I suggest complete removal, since it isn't really relevant to the article. --105.237.45.234 (talk) 14:24, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree, I have removed it. Count Truthstein (talk) 00:26, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

same-sex sex acts
same-sex sex acts have long been included among crimes against nature, yet the article doesn't mention them. such acts are not limited to anal sex between men, and they are commonly preformed by people who are not homosexual or bisexual.

as someone notes below, the fact that non-human animals preform such acts doesn't somehow prove that they are "natural" because the concept is teleological, going back to Aristotle, who believed that animals didn't commit such acts because they were "unnatural" rather than that they were not natural because because animals didn't commit them.

but this article is about the law, and the laws of many Western societies and non-western ones influenced by the West have and some still do include same-sex sex acts among those forbidden by crimes against nature laws. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.63.222 (talk) 14:36, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Crime against nature. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081012085225/http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/public/coa/opinions/2005/040636-1.htm to http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/public/coa/opinions/2005/040636-1.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130516063718/http://www.mscode.com/free/statutes/97/029/0059.htm to http://www.mscode.com/free/statutes/97/029/0059.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060223031441/http://www.ncgala.org/guide/guidecan.htm to http://www.ncgala.org/guide/guidecan.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051218003029/http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=180660005.K to http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=180660005.K

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:13, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Crime against nature. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151018163941/http://www.nola.com/printer/printer.ssf?%2Fbase%2Fnews-9%2F111466958966450.xml to http://www.nola.com/printer/printer.ssf?%2Fbase%2Fnews-9%2F111466958966450.xml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:26, 20 January 2018 (UTC)