A Different Kind of Trivia Here at the Lounge

Source: here. 

Comments

[Concerned Citizen]

As for the first, my guess is these four are criminally slow to learn the "mind your own business" mantra.

As for the second, one can only assume those four did not feel it necessary to instruct its citizens not to "pahtie wid dah cadavers", so to speak, on pain of prosecution. Weekend at Bernie's notwithstanding, of course - special dispensation for this in the Hamptons, via Hollywood.

More interesting might be how many other states there are that also do not have a specific statute against necrophilia.

Is it only these four?

If not only these four, one wonders what your point could have been.

[Concerned Citizen]

After a few minutes googling, it turns out even the original premise is flawed because these states appear to have laws criminalizing the mistreatment or abuse of a corpse and include necrophilia (either by statute or by their case law) in same.

So again, while I don't care much either way, it does cause questions as to the motivation for making the original post.

South-bashing?

Any other particular reason?

[anon]

Oh, Gawker? Sounds legit.

I was about to use Lexis to verify this, but, nevermind! The link is to one of the most very preftigious legal thinktanks!

I must’ve been mislead by somehow thinking that Lawrence v. Texas could somehow mean that consenting adults can do whatever they want with other consenting (living) adults, without regard to individual states’ laws.

My Fault. Whoever these proles are that publish opinions into the “U.S.” reporter series need to get the memo. Apparently anti-sodomy laws are still valid, and these proles' legal scholarship doesn’t compare to Gawker’s!

[SodomyIsFun]

Regardless of the inaccuracies, and perhaps the veiled South-bashing nature of this post, one fact is inescapable: the Louisiana House this week voted to keep its sodomy ban on the books.