Long Term Fornication

Laws. Laws. Laws. Ever since Moses was handed the Big 10, the powers whomever be at the moment have inundated us with laws. Some good; some just utterly stupid. I’ll be the first to say that laws are necessary for an ordered society. But it seems that the legislative intent pertaining to the enactment of some laws, both federal and state, clearly intrudes upon the personal life of an individual.

North Carolina’s “fornication and adultery statute” dates back to 1805 and still stands on solid ground today even though it is rarely, if ever, enforced. It provides for criminal sanctions for the heinous offense of cohabitation of unmarried couples. No, don’t read into this the word ”homosexual”. Think “heterosexual”. A 40 year old woman lived with her boyfriend in a state of unwedded bliss. Her employer, the Sheriff of Pender Co, N.C., uncovering the details of the sordid affair, gave the woman an ultimatum. Marry the guy, move out or find other employment. She chose to quit and live happily ever after with her boyfriend or at least until the state found some other method to intrude.

I find two things quite ironic with the case. First, the legislative intent behind the law concerns the family value argument and that the law is designed to strengthen the sanctity of marriage and provide for lawful procreation. Yep, Bubba, we have to save ourselves from not only those damn homosexuals, but also those straight fornicators. Sorry, N.C., but we all can’t be W.A.S.Pish. Would it be any different if only one toothbrush was maintained in the house?

Secondly, and I find this so amusing, the woman was in violation of the law. Her boss, the Sheriff, found out. However, he mad no attempt to incarcerate her. To this date the loving live in couple is still cohabitating in notorious open defiance and scandal and the state has not prosecuted.

Now enter the A.C.L.U. Although I once carried a membership card issued by the ultra liberal organization, my relationship is one of love/hate. The group serves a useful purpose in protecting our liberties, but sometimes they should sit on the sidelines and watch the world go by. But this is one of the cases where they should be involved and so they have entered the fray on behalf of the woman. They have the law on their side. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas anti-sodomy in 2003 on the basis that what consenting adults do in the privacy of their homes does not justify an unwarranted intrusion by the state. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). Today, a federal judge in Nebraska struck down that state’s law banning gay marriages based upon the same case. However, the fact pattern of the N.C. case may pose problems since she was never arrested.