Michigan Courts: Life in Prison for Adultery

Yeah, good point BH. You are physically endowed the inherent right at birth to put your sexual organs where you want to. The fact that you choose to give up that right at marriage is one that seems to elude the "unreal" sex offenders.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by clearwater
If the disease of addiction was not criminalized it would not be an ongoing struggle for sufferers of chronic pain to get enough drugs to treat their problem.

Addiction is not criminalized. It is the possession and distribution of illegal substances or the illegal possession or distribution of controlled substances that is illegal.

Contrary to the "conventional wisdom" of a few decades ago, for those who take narcotic pain killers appropriately, addiction to those substances is rare, but regardless of how one becomes addicted, treatment options are available.

Patients may find that they develop tolerance to opioid pain medications and may need to have their doses increased in order to be effective. Tolerance has not been shown to lead to drug addiction in patients who take opioid drugs for medical reasons. Physical dependence on opioid pain medications does not seem to occur in cancer patients. Once the pain disappears (usually through the effective treatment of cancer), these patients can discontinue the pain medicine without difficulty.

psychologytoday.com...

Ultimately, the responsibility does not lie with the pharmaceutical companies, but rather with the addicted. Help is available.

[edit on 2007/1/16 by GradyPhilpott]

Decriminalizing the disease of addiction means decriminalizing drugs. As it is controlled substances create a huge black market that basically funds much of the black ops activities.

Pharmaceutical companies selling addictive opiates and then justice systems that use obscure laws to jail the addicts dealing and buying them perpetuate an assault on the bill of rights.

What would you suggest we do with addicts who are incapable of staying clean? - Jail them?

Jail them with obscure laws that will never effect people with better access to lawyers and drugs.

The war on drugs is really a war on the bill of rights. This case is a good example of that. So is the recent shooting of the granny in her home.

[edit on 16-1-2007 by clearwater]

The war on drugs has several ill effects, including making MDs leery of prescribing narcotics for those who truly suffer.

However, jailing drug addicts who commit crimes is a perfectly appropriate action. In jail or prison, addicts can receive the treatment they need and deserve.

Having said that, perhaps it would be better to return to the more salient topic of discussion in this thread.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Yeah, good point BH. You are physically endowed the inherent right at birth to put your sexual organs where you want to.

Just be sure to qualify that statement with the fact that it must be legal and consensual.

Please excuse my immature opening response, but the idea of making adultery criminal, let alone punishable by incarceration is WHACKED.

Stop playing the victim you babies. Of course it hurts to be betrayed. Betrayal of love, and commitment may be the most severe betrayal, emotionally. IMO, if you seek punishment against someone you love, (and you don't stop loving someone because they cheat on you) then you didn't love them in the first place. Think about that.

BTW, there is justice for adultery. Legally, you get a divorce, with monetary awards, granting you hadn't broke the contract first yourself. If you don't think that's punishment, ask any divorcee who pays alamony, or other spousal/child support. -- Emotionaly, and socially, you get justice by LIVING BETTER. There is no other punishment that transcends 'living better', than your adulterous ex-spouse.

My concern is the zealot whom initiated this bill, and the zealots who agreed to it. I've lived in Michagan multiple times, and this kind of thing coming from there, does not surprise me one bit.

The bible belt begins in Saganaw.

The title is misleading -- the legal finding has nothing to do with adultry and everything to do with sex as a part of another crime, in this case illegal trade of a controlled substance (OxyContin).

I know some people in this thread have gotten that, but it appears others have not.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
The title is misleading -- the legal finding has nothing to do with adultry and everything to do with sex as a part of another crime, in this case illegal trade of a controlled substance (OxyContin).

I know some people in this thread have gotten that, but it appears others have not.

And even in the case that some posters are not considering the fact that this has to be in conjunction with the commission of any other felony, why should the extramarital sex have any bearing on a sentance that severe?

[edit on 17-1-2007 by TrueAmerican]

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
And even in the case that some posters are not considering the fact that this has to be in conjunction with the commission of any other felony, why should the extramarital sex have any bearing on a sentance that severe?

From my reading, the law doesn't say anything about extramarital sex, it says sax with any person. So unmarried people and people having sex with their spouse seem to be covered:

750.520b Criminal sexual conduct in the first degree; felony; consecutive terms.
Sec. 520b.

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree if he or she engages in sexual penetration with another person and if any of the following circumstances exists:
...
(c) Sexual penetration occurs under circumstances involving the commission of any other felony.

Michigan State Code Section 750.520b

If after reading the law, let me know if I missed something.

[edit on 1/17/2007 by djohnsto77]

Originally posted by nextguyinline
BTW, there is justice for adultery. Legally, you get a divorce, with monetary awards, granting you hadn't broke the contract first yourself. If you don't think that's punishment, ask any divorcee who pays alamony, or other spousal/child support. -- Emotionaly, and socially, you get justice by LIVING BETTER. There is no other punishment that transcends 'living better', than your adulterous ex-spouse.

This is not true. Examples abound about men whose wives have cheated on them. The men end up being the one that has to move out of the house he is paying for, pay child support (with no right to ask for an accounting of the funds), and give 50% of everything he has worked for, including future pensions, to the cheating spouse. And custody continues to favor the mother, since she is seen as the most naturally nurturing parent.

The American divorce system is far from fair or perfect. Courts in many states do not wish to get in the middle of any argument from a spouse who says they cheated because their "emotional needs" were not being met or other such tripe. So they tend to ignore the fact that adultery has been committed.

Going to be a real sticky-wicky to prove in court.

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint

For example, if a wife cheats on her husband, giving birth to a child that is not biologically her husband's, the husband should be able to sue for any monetary or psychological investment he made towards the child under the false pretense the child was biologically his.

And visa versa.... this is one of the few ways I can see this 'crime' being prosecuted and proven in court. Simple blood tests are widely used for proving paternity on a daily basis.

But in cases where no offspring has resulted from the illicit affair, direct testimony of the 'other' man or woman would be needed as evidence in a trial. Even then without collaborating first-hand testimony or evidence (actual video of the carnal knowledge?), a defense case of vindication/retribution could probably be made to create enough doubt to sway a jury or even a grand jury that this is not something taxpayers should be involved in supporting (a convict for the rest of his life).

The adulterous partner's partner would have to be in pretty bad shape to testify against their lover, no? But then what kind of morals did he or she have to become involved in an extra-marital affair in the first place?

Unless this is the point of the legislation, TO PROVE the morals of the criminal action, I still see plenty of room for reasonable doubt.

This is this biggest load of $hit I have heard in a long while.

I live in Michigan know this law well it was established a long time ago and has never been enforced. I study it in law school, it is very vauge and could be interpreted in many ways.

This is a huge laugh because our own attorney general was caught cheating on his wife and had to publicly applogize. It was a huge deal in our state, but he said he was sorry for it. And what's even more funny is the AG last name is Cox's.

[edit on 17-1-2007 by Realtruth]

So you can kill a guy and get 20 years but if you commit adultery you get life in prison. That sounds fair???