Sodomy

In Dante Alighieri’s Inferno, those who are in hell are placed into different levels based on the severity of their sins. Each of these levels punishes sinners based on the sins they committed while on earth. It is Dante the poet who decides where each sin falls in his “nine circles” of hell, and he chooses this based on his morals. The observation of sinners made by Dante in the Inferno proves him to be a Christian man, as he places both the unbaptized and sodomites in hell, directly aligning with

disloyalty throughout all of the ancient times. As well as using animals to symbolize the sins, he also uses levels and circles of hell to display the severity of each sin. For example homosexuality is placed on the second circle, while its compared sodomy is placed far down below homosexuality in the bottom ring of the seventh circle. The reasoning behind the categories and the circles are based on Dante’s views of religion and feelings towards each individual sin.

In order for a gay marriage law to be passed, the state would first have to repeal its sodomy law, or have it ruled unconstitutional. Hawaii's sodomy law was repealed through legislation action in 1973 (Bull 44), which helped open a window for a landmark case. In 1993, the case Baehr v. Lewin came before Hawaii's court system. It consisted of three couples, two lesbian

HIV/AIDS, was a disease with social stigma due to its association with the gay community. However, after the rise of sexual liberation starting in the 1960s, the fear of homosexuals became more concrete, as sexuality was discussed more openly[footnoteRef:35]. Historically a disease was viewed in both social and cultural terms, and the ill can be viewed as being caused by perversions from societal norms[footnoteRef:36]. This happened with the HIV/AIDS epidemic. For conservatives, HIV/AIDS was a justified

and 2004 two cases concerning same sex rights appeared before the Canadian and American supreme courts. The Supreme Court of the United States heard the case of Lawrence et al. v. Texas, which dealt with the constitutionality of sodomy laws prohibiting male on male sodomy. The Canadian Supreme Court also dealt with a case related to same-sex rights, but in a very different setting. The case before the Canadian Supreme Court was Reference re Same-Sex Marriage, a reference case dealing with the constitutionality

Deviance is a behavior that does not conform to social norms, therefore is socially created. Since most people in the United States believe that homosexuality is wrong, society has created homosexuality to be a deviance. Since deviance is relative and not absolute to a society, homosexuality is not a universal form of sexual deviance. There are many cultures that accept forms of homosexuality. The Western society is not accepting of it though, and many times this non-accepting view cause discrimination

mayor of London, and John Britby of York county. The source states that John Rykener, calling himself Eleanor, was found in a stall “...committing that detestable unmentionable and ignominious vice.” Which was almost certainly sodomy. Though it does beg to mention that while sodomy is obviously bad in the eyes of the Church, why would they bother giving the alleged crime such a lengthy introduction whilst not simply naming the crime. The document goes on to state how John had allegedly been taught to

would be less likely to be tempted by the wives of other men. "A church father gave a blessing to a young man leaving a brothel because if other men followed his example they would be less tempted to tamper with another mans wife or revert to sodomy."11 Sodomy was

the morality of sodomy, particularly sodomy between homosexuals, rather than the constitutional question of privacy. The Court made substantial progress in defining the right to privacy in the preceding years, but the decision in Bowers demonstrated that even the “highest Court in the land” is sometimes unable to look beyond stereotypes and prejudices (Banks, 92). In Bowers, the Court protected a statute which enabled Georgia to prosecute a homosexual for engaging in sodomy in his home. This

of the law. Married heterosexual sex "with its regular sexuality, had a right to more discretion," under repression, so the bourgeoisie found alternate sex acts to target and discuss. (Foucault, The History of Sexuality, p. 38) Previously same sex sodomy had just been against the law, but then people began examining the reason behind engaging in homosexual sex and identifying characteristics associated with the act. "The nineteenth-century homosexual became a personage, a past, a case history, and