[ad_1]
The term “felony against nature” was used in the US in the 1800s to refer to sexual practices considered “against nature.” Bestiality, oral sex, and homosexual activity were included. The concept was declared unconstitutional in 2003, but some states still have laws using this phrase. The laws were often enforced unevenly and could be used to control private activity. The concept of an act “against nature” has been contested by biologists. States with these laws on their books do not enforce them.
The term “felony against nature” began to be used in statutes in the United States in the 1800s to refer to sexual practices that were considered “against nature.” The practice of pursuing certain sexual practices predates the use of the term “crime against nature” and occurred in many nations of the world before 1800, persisting in some areas today. In the United States, where the phrase has been used in criminal law, the concept of a crime against nature was declared unconstitutional in a 2003 case, although laws using this phrase are still in effect in several states.
A number of different practices have been included under the umbrella of this term. Bestiality was considered a crime against nature, as were oral sex and homosexual activity. In some areas, even masturbation was considered a crime against nature. Many of these laws have been designed and enforced to target same-sex couples, especially gay men.
Arguments in defense of maintaining such laws have highlighted that they could provide additional burdens for some types of criminal cases. For example, someone accused of child molestation could also be accused of committing a crime against nature. Similarly, people accused of rape could be charged with crimes against nature and laws related to rape. These laws have also been enforced in solicitation cases to increase the severity of solicitation charges.
However, some advocates have pointed out that these laws have often been unevenly enforced. For example, if a heterosexual couple were found engaging in sexual activity in public, they would likely be charged with indecency, while a same-sex couple could be charged with crimes against nature in addition to indecency. There was also concern that such laws could be used to control activity between consenting adults that occurs in private, which many Americans felt uneasy about.
The concept of an act “against nature” has also been contested by biologists. The study of numerous animal species has shown that all the activities discussed in the second paragraph actually occur in nature and are quite widespread among some species.
As a result of challenging the constitutionality of such laws, states with crimes against nature laws on their books do not enforce them. Other areas of the penal code may address specific issues for which these laws were once used, to ensure that people who commit crimes such as rape and child molestation can be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
[ad_2]