Attacking OPPOSITE Sex Couples Too!

Beware Of God

N.C. Anti-Cohabitation Law Under Attack
AP ^ | 05/09/05 | STEVE HARTSOE


Posted on 05/09/2005 12:56:01 PM PDT by nypokerface


RALEIGH, N.C. - There are some 144,000 unmarried couples living together in North Carolina, and they are all breaking the law — a statute that has been on the books since 1805.

The law against cohabitation is rarely enforced. But now the American Civil Liberties Union is suing to overturn it altogether, on behalf of a former sheriff's dispatcher who says she had to quit her job because she wouldn't marry her live-in boyfriend.

Deborah Hobbs, 40, says her boss, Sheriff Carson Smith of Pender County, near Wilmington, told her to get married, move out or find another job after he found out she and her boyfriend had been living together for three years. The couple did not want to get married, so Hobbs quit.

Her lawsuit, filed in March in state court, seeks to have the cohabitation law declared unconstitutional.

"Certainly the government has no business regulating relationships between consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes," said Jennifer Rudinger, state executive director of the ACLU. "This law is 200 years old and a lot of people are very surprised that we even have it on the books."

The sheriff told the Star-News of Wilmington last year that Hobbs' employment was a moral issue as well as a legal question. He said that he tries to avoid hiring people who openly live together, but he doesn't send out deputies to enforce the law.

Hobbs, who is still living with her boyfriend, declined to be interviewed for this story.

Rudinger and other legal experts believe a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court ruling striking down a Texas anti-sodomy law may undermine the basis for North Carolina's cohabitation law, which carries a fine of up to $1,000 and up to 60 days in jail.

Arnold Loewy, a law professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said the ACLU lawsuit is almost certain to succeed. If the high court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas protects consensual sex among adults, "it's hard to understand any serious argument that it would not include" the right to live together, he said.

North Carolina is one of seven states that still have laws on the books prohibiting cohabitation of unmarried couples. The others are Virginia, West Virginia, Florida, Michigan, Mississippi and North Dakota. North Carolina appears to be the only state where the law is being challenged.

The Virginia Supreme Court in January responded to the Lawrence v. Texas decision by striking down that state's rarely enforced state law prohibiting sex between unmarried people. But a Virginia law against cohabitation remains on the books.

In January, the North Dakota House defeated a challenge to its cohabitation law on a 52-37 vote.

There were roughly three dozen cohabitation-related charges filed in North Carolina between 1997 and 2004, according to state figures. But the number of people actually convicted under the law — formally known as the fornication and adultery statute — is not clear, said Patrick Tamer, a statistician with the North Carolina court system.

At least one judge, U.S. Magistrate Carl Horn in Charlotte, regularly asks defendants whether their living arrangements violate the cohabitation ban. Horn, who declined to be interviewed for this story, has refused to release violators unless they promise to comply.

"We think that it's good to have a law against cohabitation because the studies show that couples that cohabitate before they're married, that their marriages are more prone to break up, there's less stability in the marriage," said Bill Brooks, executive director of the conservative North Carolina Family Policy Council.

But the Rev. Jack McKinney of Pullen Memorial Baptist Church in Raleigh, which counts gay couples among its 900-person congregation, said: "I think the state's got better things to do than try to dictate people's private lives to that degree."
6,487 views 12 replies
Reply #1 Top
Gotta love 200 year old laws that are absolutely retarded and should have been repealed 80 years ago, but have been forgotten about by 99.999% of the population
Reply #2 Top
Unless it becomes convenient to use them to attack those someone has some beef with. I mean how many states still have sodomy laws on the books? It's absurd! I live with a woman that I am not in a relationship with...a two bedroom apt.. Is this cohabitation? I soon will be moving in with my girlfriend, though I see a great difference I don't need the government trying to define it for me. Don't we have better things to worry about?
Reply #3 Top
Where should the line between acceptance and tolerance of lifestyle be drawn. It seems that it's ok for an employer to "accept" some lifestyle choices of the employees, but others are ok to not tolerate.

In the case of police officers (and a few other professions), they have sworn oaths to uphold the law. Is it that far out of bounds to expect them to obey laws on the books? Sure, this law is ancient and doesn't reflect today's tolerance of such lifestyle choices, but wouldn't the proper order of things to be, change the law, instead of flaunt it?

The officer in question knew the law, yet chose to break it. Now she whines and cries because there are consequences to her actions? Isn't it pretty hypocritical of her to do this, while making people face the consequences of their own decisions on a daily basis?

How many times has this officer heard the excuse, "But it's just a little pot, it shouldn't be illegal anyway"? If she wants the law changed, work to change it. I'd say to this officer, Quit being a hypocrite!!
Reply #4 Top
Actually she most likely wasn't a cop. Most Sheriff's departments use civilian dispatchers. I knew a woman who was a dispatcher for a Sheriff's dept. in NC and she was a civilian, not an officer.

This law involves invasion of privacy and should be taken from the books in all states. While my personal beliefs on the matter may tell me that it's immoral, that doesn't mean others don't have their own views on the matter. This is not a criminal matter and shouldn't be treated as one, and it certainly shouldn't mean losing your job unless your a minster in a church that preaches against living in sin.

As this is a government job she was in, she has very good grounds for suit on the grounds of discrimination. A person's personal living conditions shouldn't be a basis for them being fired.
Reply #5 Top
Oh, I agree that the law should be changed, and you're right, she may not have been an officer, however, most government employees do (either by actual oath or signed statement) agree to uphold the laws.

Lawmakers at every jurisdiction should stop worrying about new law and take some time to go through their books and find outdated or archaic laws. "Well, it shouldn't be illegal anyway" is no excuse for breaking the law. The only way she should have grounds for a lawsuit is if she can demonstrate that others have lived with their significant others and were not given the same ultimatum. If everyone was treated equal in the same situation, she has no grounds.
Reply #6 Top
Sure, let's go through the books and find anything that hints of any sort of moral influence...maybe we can aspire to be like the Greek or Roman empires and completely drop into the lowest levels of insane debauchery that they did. Yes, I think that's a wonderful idea. We'll finally see the demise of this outdated concept called "orderly society". Mmm-hmm, yes, give me a large helping of that, please. Wait a minute....we have the perfect model for this....Sodom and Gamorrah. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Good grief.
Reply #7 Top
My god, I find it hard to believe that such an intrusive law is still on the books.Can we do anything about it? I lived with my husband for 8 years before we got married, and we definitely weren't being "sinful" or anything, we were just waiting until we both felt that we were ready to get married. I feel terrible that this woman lost her job over such nonsense. I'm not a resident of NC, but my parents are- I wonder if a petition would do anything? Or maybe we need to contact a congressman or district attorney? Let me know if I can help, this is absolute BS. Cheryl
Reply #8 Top
Gamorrah


sounds like the name of a city in ireland.

cuz they worked so well in 2004, i'd guess you can expect to see the same-sex marriage initiative pot being boiled again in 2008. by 2012 they'll need a new moral values issue...this one would dovetail nicely with the abstinence education/pledge thing.

both will likely be spun as the last line of defense against inter-species relationships. for good reason too. nobody has a more ummm intimate understanding of that issue than good ol neal horsely as was revealed by neal during an on-air radio conversation with alan colmes.

here's a brief excerpt of the transcript:

Alan Colmes: "You had sex with animals?"

Neal Horsley: "Absolutely. I was a fool. When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule."

AC: "I'm not so sure that that is so."

NH: "You didn't grow up on a farm in Georgia, did you?"

later on horsely provided a more detailed explanation:

"You experiment with anything that moves when you are growing up sexually. You're naive. You know better than that... If it's warm and it's damp and it vibrates you might in fact have sex with it."
Reply #9 Top
Well, it shouldn't be illegal anyway" is no excuse for breaking the law.


Actually it kind of is. There are a ton of "blue" laws still on the books that don't make any sense. Just because something is against the law doesn't necessarily make it morally wrong just as doing something that isn't necessarily illegal doesn't necessarily make it morally acceptable.

we have the perfect model for this....Sodom and Gamorrah


You're absolutely right, let's go back to issuing Scarlet letters and branding people...no wait, better yet, let's bring back stoning people to death!

http://www.bitoffun.com/Stupid_Laws.htm

Here are the blue laws of my state:

The land of 10,000 lakes declares mosquitoes a public nuisance.

It is illegal to stand around any building without a good reason to be there.

A person may not cross state lines with a duck atop his head.
It is illegal to sleep naked.

All men driving motorcycles must wear shirts.

Citizens may not enter Wisconsin with a chicken on their head.
Oral sex is prohibited. (Repealed)

All bathtubs must have feet.

Residents of even numbered addresses may not water their plants on odd-numbered days excluding the thirty first day where it applies. (Cottage Grove)

It shall be the duty of any policeman or any other officer to enforce the provisions of this Section, and if any cat is found running at large, or which is found in any street, alley or public place, it shall be the duty of any policeman or other officer of the city to kill such cat. (Hibbing)

Red cars may not drive down Lake Street. (Minneapolis)

Driving a truck with dirty tires is considered a public nuisance. (Minnetonka)

Placing tacks on a sidewalk is considered a public nuisance. (Minnetonka)

Any person who persuades another to enter a massage therapist business after 11:00 PM is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Minnetonka)

Hamburgers may not be eaten on Sundays. (St. Cloud)

You're not allowed to park your elephant on Main Street. (Virginia)

Reply #10 Top
She may not be standing up for the law, but she is standing up for justice, which is a higher calling.
Reply #11 Top
"Citizens may not enter Wisconsin with a chicken on their head. " Last weekend when we did this, I would have never thought I was breaking the law!!