<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: State of Virginia Laws Still Ban Cohabitation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jdjournal.com/2013/02/05/state-of-virginia-laws-still-ban-cohabitation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jdjournal.com/2013/02/05/state-of-virginia-laws-still-ban-cohabitation/</link>
	<description>Legal Industry News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 21:51:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: JFB</title>
		<link>http://www.jdjournal.com/2013/02/05/state-of-virginia-laws-still-ban-cohabitation/comment-page-1/#comment-235477</link>
		<dc:creator>JFB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2013 00:06:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jdjournal.com/?p=55888#comment-235477</guid>
		<description>Adultery is a felony in Michigan, and fornication is a misdemeanor. There have been no prosecutions for decades.
There is no need to take them off of the books, as a practical matter, due to enforcement.  I suspect the same is true in Virginia.

The best reason to remove or repeal such laws is much more subtle.
 
Laws which attempt to impose or enforce morality are foolish, cause a general disrespect for every law, and, in the long-run, commonly cause reactions which are directly contrary to their initial goals.

It can be argued that were there never laws banning abortion, the practice would would never have been elevated to a constitutionally guaranteed right (which some would have the society finance as well).

It is impossible to control illicit co-habitation, specific sexual practices, adultery or fornication.  To try makes an ass out of the law and tempts deluded jurists, special interest groups, political parties or legislatures to &quot;protect&quot; those activities.  Each of them could easily be pushed into the constitutional penumbra where the &quot;rights&quot; to birth control and pregnancy termination presently reside.
  
If these actions are really &quot;crimes against nature&quot; they will naturally be limited in their practice, not by the imposition of any law, but rather by the damages they inflict on those who practice them.

All I ask in the &quot;morals&quot; area is that neither myself, nor any other taxpayer, be compelled to pay for such activities, or in any manner subsidize or alleviate, through social programs or otherwise, the damages and discord which they visit upon their practitioners.

If we leave the foolish where we find them, and do not relieve them of the burdens which they have imposed upon themselves, the frequency of such activities will naturally diminish.  The ultimate result will be the originally sought improvement of the society which spawned the &quot;morals&quot; laws in the first place.

The correct answer is to allow the foolish to do as they will without an unenforceable law  attempting to impose one persons &quot;morality&quot; on another. 

Members of society must have the freedom to do as they wish (as long as the action does bring direct harm to another&#039;s person or property) and the assurance that they will have to pay the full cost, and be totally responsible for, their volitional activities. 

When it is relearned that compliance with conventional morality is actually least cost option the society will commence its healing and improvement process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adultery is a felony in Michigan, and fornication is a misdemeanor. There have been no prosecutions for decades.<br />
There is no need to take them off of the books, as a practical matter, due to enforcement.  I suspect the same is true in Virginia.</p>
<p>The best reason to remove or repeal such laws is much more subtle.</p>
<p>Laws which attempt to impose or enforce morality are foolish, cause a general disrespect for every law, and, in the long-run, commonly cause reactions which are directly contrary to their initial goals.</p>
<p>It can be argued that were there never laws banning abortion, the practice would would never have been elevated to a constitutionally guaranteed right (which some would have the society finance as well).</p>
<p>It is impossible to control illicit co-habitation, specific sexual practices, adultery or fornication.  To try makes an ass out of the law and tempts deluded jurists, special interest groups, political parties or legislatures to &#8220;protect&#8221; those activities.  Each of them could easily be pushed into the constitutional penumbra where the &#8220;rights&#8221; to birth control and pregnancy termination presently reside.</p>
<p>If these actions are really &#8220;crimes against nature&#8221; they will naturally be limited in their practice, not by the imposition of any law, but rather by the damages they inflict on those who practice them.</p>
<p>All I ask in the &#8220;morals&#8221; area is that neither myself, nor any other taxpayer, be compelled to pay for such activities, or in any manner subsidize or alleviate, through social programs or otherwise, the damages and discord which they visit upon their practitioners.</p>
<p>If we leave the foolish where we find them, and do not relieve them of the burdens which they have imposed upon themselves, the frequency of such activities will naturally diminish.  The ultimate result will be the originally sought improvement of the society which spawned the &#8220;morals&#8221; laws in the first place.</p>
<p>The correct answer is to allow the foolish to do as they will without an unenforceable law  attempting to impose one persons &#8220;morality&#8221; on another. </p>
<p>Members of society must have the freedom to do as they wish (as long as the action does bring direct harm to another&#8217;s person or property) and the assurance that they will have to pay the full cost, and be totally responsible for, their volitional activities. </p>
<p>When it is relearned that compliance with conventional morality is actually least cost option the society will commence its healing and improvement process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
