Bill would forbid divorcing parents in Massachusetts from having sex in home

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
Boston.com

Massachusetts must have recently become part of Alabama.

[Blue3]

It's a bill. Won't pass.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

It's a bill. Won't pass.

No one expects it to, it's just funny seeing this out of Massachusetts.

I believe it was wormyguy who once said MA has some socially conservative pockets?  I guess he was right if these are the people they're electing.

[NewYorkExpress]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Boston.com

Massachusetts must have recently become part of Alabama.
[/quote]

Honestly, this seems more like a liberal point of view... Conservatives would want to restrict the sexual activity after the divorce, not during IMO

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Since technically its adultery and would have an effect on the divorce proceedings anyway (unless the Massachusetts definition of adultery is suspended once a divorce is filed for) I don't really see the point of the bill.

Incidentally, when I saw the thread title my thought was "They're trying to ban the divorcing couple from having sex with each other?  Why?"

[Indy Texas]

Since technically its adultery and would have an effect on the divorce proceedings anyway (unless the Massachusetts definition of adultery is suspended once a divorce is filed for) I don't really see the point of the bill.

Incidentally, when I saw the thread title my thought was "They're trying to ban the divorcing couple from having sex with each other?  Why?"

Is it considered adultery when a couple have separated and filed for divorce? It seems like at that point the marriage is more or less a vestigial formality awaiting dissolution and seeking other partners is fair game.

[RedSLC]

I don't know the exact figures, but it looks like Romney won the state senate district of the bill's sponsor.

Bu yeah, the Massachusetts senate currently has four republicans. There's no way this will pass.

[Deus Naturae]

lol Rick Ross

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I don't know the exact figures, but it looks like Romney won the state senate district of the bill's sponsor.

Bu yeah, the Massachusetts senate currently has four republicans. There's no way this will pass.

He's currently occupying the former Senate seat of Scott Brown and held his State House seat, too, so yeah, this is obviously a conservative pocket of MA.

[ElectionsGuy]

lol

But yes, Massachusetts has the 3rd most democrat dominated legislature in the country (behind Rhode Island and Hawaii). Is this guy from Plymouth County? Worcester County?

[Deus Naturae]

lol

But yes, Massachusetts has the 3rd most democrat dominated legislature in the country (behind Rhode Island and Hawaii). Is this guy from Plymouth County? Worcester County?

His district encompasses Norfolk, Bristol and Middlesex Counties.

[Torie]

The Bill on its face is totally Unconstitutional, and a federal judge would swat it down in a nano-second like one does with a fly swatter to a unwanted fly, about to land on your dinner plate. Consenting adults of whatever gender, mix and match, can F in private settings with impunity, in whatever orifice they want. Isn't the Fruited Plain just the best? Next!

[MaxQue]

I don't know the exact figures, but it looks like Romney won the state senate district of the bill's sponsor.

Bu yeah, the Massachusetts senate currently has four republicans. There's no way this will pass.

I'm not even sure all those Republicans would vote for his bill.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Massachusetts State Senate is 10% Republican. Enough said.

[RedSLC]

The Bill on its face is totally Unconstitutional, and a federal judge would swat it down in a nano-second like one does with a fly swatter to a unwanted fly, about to land on your dinner plate. Consenting adults of whatever gender, mix and match, can F in private settings with impunity, in whatever orifice they want. Isn't the Fruited Plain just the best? Next!

Yep. As written, this bill is a clear violation of the right to privacy established in Griswold v. Connecticut (and expanded upon by later cases).

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Since technically its adultery and would have an effect on the divorce proceedings anyway (unless the Massachusetts definition of adultery is suspended once a divorce is filed for) I don't really see the point of the bill.

Is it considered adultery when a couple have separated and filed for divorce? It seems like at that point the marriage is more or less a vestigial formality awaiting dissolution and seeking other partners is fair game.

People have been known to file and then reconcile before the divorce becomes final, or even reconcile afterward and remarry.  Considering the impact upon a family that comes from divorce when children are involved, I don't think its unreasonable for the law to lean towards facilitating a possible reconciliation, and that would mean continuing to consider it adultery when there is a chance of reconcilation.  While I haven't read the bill, the bit in the article about the bill allowing it upon express permission of the courts is probably intended to cover cases where the court has determined that a divorce will be granted, but that division of property and custody of children and pets have yet to be specified.

[AggregateDemand]

Since technically its adultery and would have an effect on the divorce proceedings anyway (unless the Massachusetts definition of adultery is suspended once a divorce is filed for) I don't really see the point of the bill.

Incidentally, when I saw the thread title my thought was "They're trying to ban the divorcing couple from having sex with each other?  Why?"

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The Bill on its face is totally Unconstitutional, and a federal judge would swat it down in a nano-second like one does with a fly swatter to a unwanted fly, about to land on your dinner plate. Consenting adults of whatever gender, mix and match, can F in private settings with impunity, in whatever orifice they want. Isn't the Fruited Plain just the best? Next!

Prostitution is still illegal in most states, so that's not quite true.

[Likely Voter]

I suspect this has less to do with Massachusetts and more to do with Senator Richard J. Ross.

"I'll show you Marsha! I'll make it illegal for you to bang your yoga teacher in the bed I bought!"

[H. Ross Peron]

The last of the Puritans...

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I don't know the exact figures, but it looks like Romney won the state senate district of the bill's sponsor.

Bu yeah, the Massachusetts senate currently has four republicans. There's no way this will pass.

He's currently occupying the former Senate seat of Scott Brown and held his State House seat, too, so yeah, this is obviously a conservative pocket of MA.

This is almost certainly the most conservative State Senate district in the state. It's elected Democrats before, but I don't think it would elect a Democrat today without a solid reason to.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Let me just say that this "Bill" referenced in the title sounds like a huge dick.

[Torie]

The Bill on its face is totally Unconstitutional, and a federal judge would swat it down in a nano-second like one does with a fly swatter to a unwanted fly, about to land on your dinner plate. Consenting adults of whatever gender, mix and match, can F in private settings with impunity, in whatever orifice they want. Isn't the Fruited Plain just the best? Next!

Prostitution is still illegal in most states, so that's not quite true.

Prostitution involves a meretricious relationship. In this case, the two adults are "putting out" for free. It ain't prostitution.

[DemPGH]

Shall not "date" in the home? What's that even mean? Engage in sex? Totally unconstitutional. What's the enforcement mechanism anyway behind regulating this behavior? You know, assuming this bill is sane, a lot of times divorces take a long time to finalize, like a year and half or two years is not unheard of. A friend of mine a few years ago met a wonderful woman who is now very good for him - and he for her, but she was in the process of getting a divorce when they started to see each other. He was single and she was in a miserable marriage that was ending. All parties are now happy. So this bill is unconstitutional trash, and a ridiculously trollish invasion of privacy - plain and simple. Let this bill die.

[Brittain33]

Sen. Ross said he filed this bill at the request of a citizen who petitioned for it.

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/ross-says-no-sex-bill-filed-for-constituent/article_b086a124-b379-11e3-a12e-001a4bcf887a.html