Laws that regulate any sexuality tend to be controversial. The same is true in Utah. According to the AP, two Utah escort services have filed a federal lawsuit against the state because the broadly worded solicitation ordinances not only ban prostitution, but make acting sexual illegal.
No more implied sex offers in Utah with new law
According to Salt Lake City Law enforcement Chief Chris Burbank, Utah adopted its currently worded anti-prostitution laws in order to assist undercover agents working stings within the sex trade. Since asking officers to “expose or touch themselves” is now against Utah law, it would not be allowed for prostitutes to ask law enforcement this to prove they aren’t law enforcement. It is completely illegal to just ask for money in exchange for sexual favors. Now, it is too illegal in Utah to have any “lewd” or “suggestive” nonverbal acts due to the amendments.
According to Burbank, non-prostitutes will not be targeted with the law. It is simply to stop the sex trade from occurring, specifically when under-aged parties are involved.
“Officers were being put in a position that we’re not going to allow, so we took a different direction,” he told the AP.
Is it a crime to be sexy?
The escort service will be represented by attorney Andrew McCullough in the lawsuit. He is worried that some of the other businesses with sexual components will be in legal trouble. Several people have to “act sexy” for work but are not selling sexual favors. McCullough explains this could contain strip club dancers.
“Most girls who touch their breasts are not telling you they’re open for sex,” the attorney said.
Acting sexual isn’t good at home, either
In other strange sex news, a Massachusetts bill would make it a crime for parents to have intercourse at home if they’re in the process of a divorce. The idea is to protect kids and slow domestic violence, according to Wrentham, Mass., Selectman Robert Leclair. Critics claim the law wouldn’t only rob parents of their rights, but additionally ban any sexual relationship within the home until the divorce is final, yet another example of broad wording.
On the bright side, supporters of the bill point out that it would too end the practice of lifetime alimony payments and cap how much one spouse could be ordered to pay the other.
Rounding out the docket with bestiality
Bestiality would have been banned in Florida with Senate Bill 344 too. Sen. Nan Rich of Sunrise, Fla., who first introduced the bill in 2009, believes that such legislation is long overdue in the Sunshine State. However, some critics maintain that SB 344 is another bill that suffers from overly broad verbiage. SB 344 could be banning human sexual intercourse since the word “animals” in the phrase “sex with animals” may be referring to humans too, according to Escapist Magazine.
Articles cited
Associated Press
wapo.st/jgXAOq
Escapist Magazine
escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.283827-Florida-outlaws-sex
Mother Jones
motherjones.com/mojo/2011/05/annals-big-government-florida-ban-bestiality-baggy-pants
My Fox Boston
bit.ly/m50Qb6
David Archuleta’s dad Jeff could not resist the sexy (allegedly)
youtube.com/watch?v=xm6R-V3tL8g
No comments:
Post a Comment