Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Deceiving Your Sex Partner Would Be a Crime Under Bill Backed by New York Democrats

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Deceiving Your Sex Partner Would Be a Crime Under Bill Backed by New York Democrats

    Obtaining sex through "deception," "concealment," or "artifice" could violate consent. A group of New York lawmakers is trying to redefine consent in a way that would make it a crime to be less than fully truthful with sex partners. Under the new proposal, antics now considered merely caddish or immoral—like lying to a prospective sex partner about one's relationship status, social standing, or future intentions—would count as criminal sexual misconduct.

    Now in committee, Assembly Bill A6540—sponsored by Assembly Member Rebecca Seawright (D–New York City) and co-sponsored by three other Democratic lawmakers—would amend New York state's penal code to define consent as "freely given knowledgeable and informed agreement" that is "obtained without the use of malice such as forcible compulsion, duress, coercion, deception, fraud, concealment or artifice."

    Sex through "forcible compulsion" is already considered rape in the first degree under New York law. The biggest change Seawright's bill would have is on the state's law against sexual misconduct.

    A person becomes guilty of sexual misconduct if "he or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person without such person's consent; or he or she engages in oral sexual conduct or **** sexual conduct with another person without such person's consent." Thus, if consent is defined as sex obtained without any deception, concealment, or artifice, anyone who lies to or omits information from a prospective sexual partner would be guilty of sexual misconduct (a class A misdemeanor).

    This could open the floodgates of criminal prosecution (and civil suits) involving any number of wrong but incredibly common situations among sexual partners. Telling a prospective sex partner that you're single when you're actually married or in a relationship would seem to fit the bill. So, too, would trying to get laid by professing more interest in a future relationship than one actually has.

    Women could be guilty for lying about contraceptive use or menstrual cycles, and men for lying about having a vasectomy.

    Trying to win over a date by saying you have a better job than you actually do, live in a nicer place, or went to a better school could become a crime if that date sleeps with you. Any half-truths—or even omissions—about your social or financial status could possibly count as artifice or "concealment." So could lying or concealing information about one's race, ethnicity, religion, etc.

    Someone might try to sue or press charges based on the idea that makeup, Botox, boob jobs, and similar measures to enhance one's appearance should count as illegal artifice that negates consent. It also seems likely that people could attempt to use the law against transgender or gender non-conforming people.

    https://reason.com/2021/04/08/deceiv...ork-democrats/

    siablo14 siablo14 likes this.

  • #2
    Females bout to be going to jail left n right if this gets enforced. Hoes got all that makeup on that could make the Swamp Thing look cute, got those fake eyelashes making them sexier, wearing booty enhancing clothes, bras that make their t^tties pop just right & just generally give you this whole fantasy version of them thats seemingly great til you down for them then they turn into whining, needy, annoying mfers taking up space in your place.

    Comment


    • #3
      They'll never stop until they have micromanaged every facet of life.

      All is fair in love and war, no one is making you play the game you can never lose if you stay out of this endeavor but government has no business in these matters.

      Comment


      • #4
        That would be hard to prove. It's a disaster. You get laid, tell someone you want to marry them - but then you change your mind on the marriage and they file charges that you only said that to get laid.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
          Obtaining sex through "deception," "concealment," or "artifice" could violate consent. A group of New York lawmakers is trying to redefine consent in a way that would make it a crime to be less than fully truthful with sex partners. Under the new proposal, antics now considered merely caddish or immoral—like lying to a prospective sex partner about one's relationship status, social standing, or future intentions—would count as criminal sexual misconduct.

          Now in committee, Assembly Bill A6540—sponsored by Assembly Member Rebecca Seawright (D–New York City) and co-sponsored by three other Democratic lawmakers—would amend New York state's penal code to define consent as "freely given knowledgeable and informed agreement" that is "obtained without the use of malice such as forcible compulsion, duress, coercion, deception, fraud, concealment or artifice."

          Sex through "forcible compulsion" is already considered rape in the first degree under New York law. The biggest change Seawright's bill would have is on the state's law against sexual misconduct.

          A person becomes guilty of sexual misconduct if "he or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person without such person's consent; or he or she engages in oral sexual conduct or **** sexual conduct with another person without such person's consent." Thus, if consent is defined as sex obtained without any deception, concealment, or artifice, anyone who lies to or omits information from a prospective sexual partner would be guilty of sexual misconduct (a class A misdemeanor).

          This could open the floodgates of criminal prosecution (and civil suits) involving any number of wrong but incredibly common situations among sexual partners. Telling a prospective sex partner that you're single when you're actually married or in a relationship would seem to fit the bill. So, too, would trying to get laid by professing more interest in a future relationship than one actually has.

          Women could be guilty for lying about contraceptive use or menstrual cycles, and men for lying about having a vasectomy.

          Trying to win over a date by saying you have a better job than you actually do, live in a nicer place, or went to a better school could become a crime if that date sleeps with you. Any half-truths—or even omissions—about your social or financial status could possibly count as artifice or "concealment." So could lying or concealing information about one's race, ethnicity, religion, etc.

          Someone might try to sue or press charges based on the idea that makeup, Botox, boob jobs, and similar measures to enhance one's appearance should count as illegal artifice that negates consent. It also seems likely that people could attempt to use the law against transgender or gender non-conforming people.

          https://reason.com/2021/04/08/deceiv...ork-democrats/
          Sad part about most of these is that they should not have been requirements to sleep with someone in the first place. These are attack on male rights and freedom of expression.

          Comment


          • #6
            Welp.... guess I'd be telling my kids that there's a steady future in lawyering if I lived in NY.

            Comment


            • #7
              As I've said before, liberals have a mental block that does not allow them to understand the Law of Unintended Consequences.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
                Obtaining sex through "deception," "concealment," or "artifice" could violate consent. A group of New York lawmakers is trying to redefine consent in a way that would make it a crime to be less than fully truthful with sex partners. Under the new proposal, antics now considered merely caddish or immoral—like lying to a prospective sex partner about one's relationship status, social standing, or future intentions—would count as criminal sexual misconduct.

                Now in committee, Assembly Bill A6540—sponsored by Assembly Member Rebecca Seawright (D–New York City) and co-sponsored by three other Democratic lawmakers—would amend New York state's penal code to define consent as "freely given knowledgeable and informed agreement" that is "obtained without the use of malice such as forcible compulsion, duress, coercion, deception, fraud, concealment or artifice."

                Sex through "forcible compulsion" is already considered rape in the first degree under New York law. The biggest change Seawright's bill would have is on the state's law against sexual misconduct.

                A person becomes guilty of sexual misconduct if "he or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person without such person's consent; or he or she engages in oral sexual conduct or **** sexual conduct with another person without such person's consent." Thus, if consent is defined as sex obtained without any deception, concealment, or artifice, anyone who lies to or omits information from a prospective sexual partner would be guilty of sexual misconduct (a class A misdemeanor).

                This could open the floodgates of criminal prosecution (and civil suits) involving any number of wrong but incredibly common situations among sexual partners. Telling a prospective sex partner that you're single when you're actually married or in a relationship would seem to fit the bill. So, too, would trying to get laid by professing more interest in a future relationship than one actually has.

                Women could be guilty for lying about contraceptive use or menstrual cycles, and men for lying about having a vasectomy.

                Trying to win over a date by saying you have a better job than you actually do, live in a nicer place, or went to a better school could become a crime if that date sleeps with you. Any half-truths—or even omissions—about your social or financial status could possibly count as artifice or "concealment." So could lying or concealing information about one's race, ethnicity, religion, etc.

                Someone might try to sue or press charges based on the idea that makeup, Botox, boob jobs, and similar measures to enhance one's appearance should count as illegal artifice that negates consent. It also seems likely that people could attempt to use the law against transgender or gender non-conforming people.

                https://reason.com/2021/04/08/deceiv...ork-democrats/
                I don't see the problem.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Look on the bright side they'll more likely believe your lies and just give them a fake name.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The first one charged will be some tranny who neglects to tell a guy “she” has a cawk.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP