Sodomy Laws: Do They Apply To Heterosexual Couples?

Sodomy laws, which prohibit certain sexual acts, have been used to target same-sex couples and, to a lesser extent, heterosexual couples. While the laws are rarely enforced against heterosexual couples, they have been used as secondary charges in cases of heterosexual sex involving sexual assault, sex with minors, public sex, and sex with animals. In the US, sodomy laws were originally derived from church law and designed to prevent non-procreative sexuality. While they were initially applied to all sexual activity outside of marital procreative sex, they began to be used to discriminate against gay people in the 1960s. In the 1986 case of Bowers v. Hardwick, the Supreme Court upheld Georgia's sodomy law, but this was later reversed in 2003 with the Lawrence v. Texas decision, which invalidated all sodomy laws in the remaining 14 states.

Sodomy laws were originally intended to protect public morals and decency

In the nineteenth century, sodomy was broadly construed as "crimes against nature, committed with mankind or with beast". This typically included any form of sexual penetration with an animal, a woman or girl, or another man or boy. The precise sexual acts criminalized by sodomy laws were rarely explicitly defined, but they generally included anal sex, oral sex, manual sex, and bestiality.

The primary purpose of sodomy laws was to uphold public morals and decency. Sodomy was often listed alongside other crimes such as bigamy, adultery, the creation and dissemination of obscene literature, incest, and public indecency. A secondary purpose of these laws was to protect women, "weak men", and children against sexual assault. Court records from the nineteenth century indicate that sodomy laws were used to prosecute non-consensual activity, while consenting adults who engaged in sodomy within their homes were typically considered immune from prosecution.

In the twentieth century, the nature and enforcement of sodomy laws changed significantly. The inclusion of oral sex in the definition of sodomy expanded the group of potential violators, and the creation of police forces in urban areas led to increased arrests and imprisonment for violations of these statutes. Public outcry against indecency, sexual solicitation, and the molestation of minors fueled the enforcement of sodomy laws. During the McCarthy era, there were also witch hunts targeting male "homosexuals", with acts of oral and anal sex between consenting adult men being conflated with child molestation.

While sodomy laws were originally intended to protect public morals and decency, they have been widely criticized for infringing on privacy and individual liberty. In 2003, the Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that state laws criminalizing private, non-commercial sexual activity between consenting adults are unconstitutional, as they violate the liberty and privacy rights provided by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. As a result, sodomy laws have been invalidated in all states, although some states still have these laws on the books and law enforcement continues to use them to harass citizens.

Sodomy laws were also used to protect women, weak men and children against sexual assault

Sodomy laws have been used to prosecute sexual acts deemed "illegal, illicit, unlawful, unnatural and/or immoral". While these laws have often targeted same-sex sexual acts, they have also been used to prosecute certain sexual acts between heterosexual couples.

In the 19th century, sodomy laws were used to protect "public morals and decency". They were also used to protect women, "weak men", and children against sexual assault. Court records from this time show that these laws were used to prosecute nonconsensual activity, while consenting adults who engaged in sodomy within their homes were considered immune from prosecution.

In the 20th century, the nature and enforcement of sodomy laws changed dramatically. The addition of oral sex to many sodomy laws, and the creation of police forces in America's rapidly growing urban areas, fueled arrests and imprisonment for violations of these statutes. City and state governments vigilantly apprehended supposed criminals in response to public outcry against indecency, sexual solicitation in cities, and the predation and molestation of minors.

Sodomy laws were also used to justify denying gay people equal treatment and to discredit LGBT voices. For example, in Utah, the sodomy law was used to justify not protecting gay people from hate crimes. In Arkansas, Florida, Mississippi, and Texas, they have been used to justify various proposals to ban adoption or foster care, sometimes successfully.

In the 21st century, the focus of sodomy laws has shifted. In 2003, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled anti-sodomy laws unconstitutional in the landmark case, Lawrence v. Texas. Despite this ruling, numerous states have not repealed their anti-sodomy laws, which reflects and contributes to the ongoing discourse of deviance associated with same-sex sexual acts.

Sodomy laws have been used to justify discrimination against homosexuals

Sodomy laws, which criminalize certain sexual acts, have been used to target and discriminate against homosexual individuals. While these laws often targeted sexual acts between persons of the same sex, they have also been applied to outlaw certain sexual acts between heterosexual couples. In the United States, sodomy laws have a long history, dating back to colonial times, and have been used to justify discrimination and deny rights to homosexual individuals.

In the late 1960s and 1970s, as the gay rights movement gained momentum, social conservatives began to invoke sodomy laws as a justification for discriminating against homosexuals. In some states, these laws were explicitly rewritten to apply only to gay people, while in others, they were treated as if they were aimed at gay people, even if they applied to all couples. These laws had significant negative impacts on the lives of gay people, limiting their ability to raise children, affecting their employment, and denying them equal treatment in public debates.

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas in 2003 was a landmark ruling that invalidated sodomy laws in the remaining states that had them, including Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Kansas. This decision affirmed that sodomy laws could not be used to justify discrimination against homosexuals and that such laws violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution. However, despite this progress, as of 2024, 61 countries worldwide still have laws criminalizing sexual activity between individuals of the same sex.

Sodomy laws have been used to limit the ability of gay people to raise children

The original purpose of sodomy laws was to prevent non-procreative sexuality and any sexuality outside of marriage. However, starting in the late 1960s, these laws began to be used specifically against gay people as the gay rights movement gained momentum. In nine states, including Kansas, Arkansas, and Texas, sodomy laws were explicitly rewritten to apply only to gay people. This discriminatory application of the law had a significant impact on the lives of gay people, particularly in the area of family and parenting rights.

Gay people's ability to raise children was directly affected by sodomy laws in several ways. Firstly, these laws were used to justify denying gay parents custody of their biological children. In states like Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Virginia, sodomy laws were cited as a reason to terminate the parental rights of gay individuals. Secondly, sodomy laws were used to block gay people from adopting children. For example, in Florida and Mississippi, sodomy laws were used as a basis for refusing to allow gay people to adopt. Lastly, gay people were also prevented from becoming foster parents due to these laws, as seen in Arkansas and Missouri.

The impact of sodomy laws on gay people's ability to form and maintain families was significant and far-reaching. Not only did they face legal barriers to adopting or fostering children, but they also risked losing custody of their biological children solely because of their sexual orientation. These laws perpetuated discrimination and hindered gay people from fully participating in family life, contributing to their marginalization and second-class status in society.

It was not until the 2003 Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas that sodomy laws were invalidated in the remaining 14 states that still had them. This landmark ruling recognized the equal protection clause and affirmed that the government could not use sodomy laws to discriminate against gay people, including in matters of family and parenting rights.

Sodomy laws have been used to justify firing gay people or denying them jobs

This interpretation of Bowers v. Hardwick was used to justify the refusal to hire a lesbian in Georgia and the firing of a lesbian x-ray technician in Washington State.

In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Romer v. Evans that states could not discriminate against gay people based on "disapproval." Despite this, Georgia's Attorney General successfully used the state's sodomy law to justify refusing to hire a lesbian.

In 2003, the Supreme Court reversed its decision in Bowers v. Hardwick with the Lawrence v. Texas decision, which invalidated all sodomy laws in the remaining 14 states. However, as of October 1, 2023, 12 U.S. states still had statutes criminalizing consensual sodomy, although these statutes are not enforceable due to the binding precedent set by Lawrence v. Texas.

Frequently asked questions