Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WJLA Washington DC)   Good news, single people in Virginia: it may soon be legal for you to have sex   (wjla.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, unmarried people, Sex, Marriage, Brad Pitt, Virginia  
•       •       •

2979 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Feb 2020 at 10:09 AM (20 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



35 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-02-10 9:12:27 AM  
Yeah, you're going to need an exorcist now.
 
2020-02-10 9:31:08 AM  
So now what is your excuse gonna be
 
2020-02-10 10:06:32 AM  
Virginia is for lovers.*

*Offer not applicable for all types of love.
 
2020-02-10 10:11:07 AM  
Just when they were getting used to sucking dick for a handful of pills.
 
2020-02-10 10:11:39 AM  
It is a law that was invalidated by Lawrence v Texas. This only is a matter of cleaning up the books.
 
2020-02-10 10:11:46 AM  
...with someone who isn't close family.
 
2020-02-10 10:13:10 AM  
Finally!
 
2020-02-10 10:15:08 AM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: Virginia is for lovers.*

*Offer not applicable for all types of love.


That's the funniest part of this whole story...
 
2020-02-10 10:15:50 AM  
OK, quick show of hands, how many Farkers were only being held back from getting laid by this law?
 
2020-02-10 10:16:25 AM  
I was this many years old when I discovered I was the result of a criminal act!


/ 12-31-1963
// was a very special night for me
 
2020-02-10 10:18:59 AM  
Virginia has been a bit behind the times- up until 2014 oral sex was a felony in VA, even between married couples.

/Felon
 
2020-02-10 10:19:11 AM  

meanmutton: It is a law that was invalidated by Lawrence v Texas. This only is a matter of cleaning up the books.


Those are dirty, dirty books!
 
2020-02-10 10:19:11 AM  
The Democrats are dragging Virginia kicking and screaming in to the 20th century.

/Maybe in a few years they'll be in the 21st.
 
2020-02-10 10:22:25 AM  

Mikey1969: OK, quick show of hands, how many Farkers were only being held back from getting laid by this law?


Not in the way you think. I can be intimate with all sorts of women. Tons. They're all from Canada; you wouldn't know them. But there are a lot! But I really respect the law too much. So just when things are starting to get amorous, I remember what we're doing is illegal, and I just can't perform! It's horrible. These nice ladies came all the way down from Medicine Hat, and instead we spend the night watching Friends reruns. Honest.
 
2020-02-10 10:23:53 AM  
Currently, fornication is a Class 4 misdemeanor and carries a fine of up to $250.
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-02-10 10:27:02 AM  
I've never been prouder to be a criminal
 
2020-02-10 10:32:35 AM  

usernameguy: The Democrats are dragging Virginia kicking and screaming in to the 20th century.

/Maybe in a few years they'll be in the 21st.

Glockenspiel Hero: Virginia has been a bit behind the times- up until 2014 oral sex was a felony in VA, even between married couples.

/Felon


And current "acting" DHS Chief Ken Kookinelli opposed letting Virginians get blow jobs:

Cuccinelli opposes homosexuality, describing homosexual acts as "against nature" and "harmful to society." He defended the constitutionality of Virginia laws prohibiting sodomy. In March 2013, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals struck down Virginia's anti-sodomy law in a case involving William Scott MacDonald, a 47-year-old man who solicited, but did not receive, oral sex from a 17-year-old girl, finding it unconstitutional based on the Supreme Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas ".

On June 25, 2013, Cuccinelli filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to uphold the law, saying the appeals court ruling would release MacDonald from probation and "threatens to undo convictions of child predators that were obtained under this law after 2003." Although the statute purported to ban all acts of sodomy and made no mention of age, Cuccinelli said the law is important for prosecutors to be able to "obtain felony charges against adults who commit or solicit this sex act with minors," and noted that the law "is not - and cannot be - used against consenting adults acting in private." In October 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Cuccinelli's appeal
 
2020-02-10 10:37:25 AM  

meanmutton: It is a law that was invalidated by Lawrence v Texas. This only is a matter of cleaning up the books.


Not quite - the people in power until recently were hoping for that ruling to be overturned.
 
2020-02-10 10:38:08 AM  

usernameguy: The Democrats are dragging Virginia kicking and screaming in to the 20th century.

/Maybe in a few years they'll be in the 21st.


Easy there, Speed Racer....
 
2020-02-10 10:38:31 AM  

Walker: usernameguy: The Democrats are dragging Virginia kicking and screaming in to the 20th century.

/Maybe in a few years they'll be in the 21st.
Glockenspiel Hero: Virginia has been a bit behind the times- up until 2014 oral sex was a felony in VA, even between married couples.

/Felon

And current "acting" DHS Chief Ken Kookinelli opposed letting Virginians get blow jobs:

Cuccinelli opposes homosexuality, describing homosexual acts as "against nature" and "harmful to society." He defended the constitutionality of Virginia laws prohibiting sodomy. In March 2013, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals struck down Virginia's anti-sodomy law in a case involving William Scott MacDonald, a 47-year-old man who solicited, but did not receive, oral sex from a 17-year-old girl, finding it unconstitutional based on the Supreme Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas ".

On June 25, 2013, Cuccinelli filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to uphold the law, saying the appeals court ruling would release MacDonald from probation and "threatens to undo convictions of child predators that were obtained under this law after 2003." Although the statute purported to ban all acts of sodomy and made no mention of age, Cuccinelli said the law is important for prosecutors to be able to "obtain felony charges against adults who commit or solicit this sex act with minors," and noted that the law "is not - and cannot be - used against consenting adults acting in private." In October 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Cuccinelli's appeal


Oh that guy definitely is a pervert.  I look forward to his inevitable arrest on child predation charges.  It is as sure as the farking sunrise at this point
 
2020-02-10 10:41:46 AM  
Wow, I had no idea. Fortunately the statute of limitations has run out since the last time that happened before I got married. UNfortunately the statute of limitations would have run out on THAT too.

/Statue
 
2020-02-10 10:43:16 AM  
*raises hand*
Question. What if I'm having unmarried sex, but it's just me? Is that still illegal?
/asking for a friend.
 
2020-02-10 10:45:34 AM  
Does this mean all Virgina prisoners were serving life?
 
2020-02-10 11:08:57 AM  

MythDragon: *raises hand*
Question. What if I'm having unmarried sex, but it's just me? Is that still illegal?
/asking for a friend.


Dating Miss Michigan?
 
TWX [TotalFark]
2020-02-10 11:11:59 AM  
Whoria?

Slutia?

NoLongerAVirginia?
 
2020-02-10 11:16:15 AM  

Enigmamf: meanmutton: It is a law that was invalidated by Lawrence v Texas. This only is a matter of cleaning up the books.

Not quite - the people in power until recently were hoping for that ruling to be overturned.


No, it explicitly was and the Virginia Supreme Court affirmed that the ruling  applied to Virginia and this particular law was invalid the following year in Martin v. Ziherl.
 
2020-02-10 11:18:13 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: MythDragon: *raises hand*
Question. What if I'm having unmarried sex, but it's just me? Is that still illegal?
/asking for a friend.

Dating Miss Michigan?


I've met a Miss Michigan.
 
2020-02-10 11:44:01 AM  

Fabric_Man: Mikey1969: OK, quick show of hands, how many Farkers were only being held back from getting laid by this law?

Not in the way you think. I can be intimate with all sorts of women. Tons. They're all from Canada; you wouldn't know them. But there are a lot! But I really respect the law too much. So just when things are starting to get amorous, I remember what we're doing is illegal, and I just can't perform! It's horrible. These nice ladies came all the way down from Medicine Hat, and instead we spend the night watching Friends reruns. Honest.


Dude, that is pure poetry right there, you should be proud! :-)
 
2020-02-10 12:00:05 PM  

MythDragon: *raises hand*
Question. What if I'm having unmarried sex, but it's just me? Is that still illegal?
/asking for a friend.


Only if it's forn.
 
2020-02-10 12:00:44 PM  

WelldeadLink: meanmutton: It is a law that was invalidated by Lawrence v Texas. This only is a matter of cleaning up the books.

Those are dirty, dirty books!


Yeah, but they're old, and the pages are all stuck together.
 
2020-02-10 12:13:55 PM  
Let's hope that single people affected are good learners.  There's a lot of catching up to do and sexual harassment laws have made a free office education perk no long viable.
 
2020-02-10 12:29:41 PM  

BitwiseShift: Let's hope that single people affected are good learners.  There's a lot of catching up to do and sexual harassment laws have made a free office education perk no long viable.


I was just curious how many college campuses are being swarmed by the cops ...

"Sorry, son, but you're on the sex offender registry forever . Enjoy your pharmacy degree"
 
2020-02-10 4:19:57 PM  
Guess the Orange Idiot better stay out of VA until they repeal that law, or ooohhhh, is he gonna have fines.
 
2020-02-10 5:18:44 PM  

Enigmamf: meanmutton: It is a law that was invalidated by Lawrence v Texas. This only is a matter of cleaning up the books.

Not quite - the people in power until recently were hoping for that ruling to be overturned.


Apparently several states are in a rush to remove their laws against fornication and adultery, precisely because the composition of the supreme court has changed, and a challenge to such laws may end up overturning Lawrence v Texas.
 
2020-02-10 8:07:35 PM  
They will have to change their name to Slutsia
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.