翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ LGBT rights in Luxembourg
・ LGBT rights in Madagascar
・ LGBT rights in Maine
・ LGBT rights in Malawi
・ LGBT rights in Malaysia
・ LGBT rights in Mali
・ LGBT rights in Malta
・ LGBT rights in Maryland
・ LGBT rights in Massachusetts
・ LGBT rights in Mato Grosso do Sul
・ LGBT rights in Mauritania
・ LGBT rights in Mauritius
・ LGBT rights in Mexico
・ LGBT rights in Mexico City
・ LGBT rights in Michigan
LGBT rights in Minnesota
・ LGBT rights in Mississippi
・ LGBT rights in Missouri
・ LGBT rights in Moldova
・ LGBT rights in Monaco
・ LGBT rights in Mongolia
・ LGBT rights in Montana
・ LGBT rights in Montenegro
・ LGBT rights in Montserrat
・ LGBT rights in Morocco
・ LGBT rights in Mozambique
・ LGBT rights in Myanmar
・ LGBT rights in Namibia
・ LGBT rights in Nauru
・ LGBT rights in Nebraska


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

LGBT rights in Minnesota : ウィキペディア英語版
LGBT rights in Minnesota

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons in the U.S. state of Minnesota have much the same rights and responsibilities as heterosexuals.
==Law regarding same-sex sexual activity==
In 1849 the Minnesota Territory was given Wisconsin's laws, including a ban on heterosexual and homosexual sodomy, which was defined by the common law. When Minnesota drafted its own criminal code, it kept this prohibition. In 1921, it expanded the definition of sodomy to include fellatio as well as anal intercourse. Beyond the criminal laws, vagrancy laws banned anyone from soliciting for "immoral purposes".
In 1939 a wave of child molestation cases in St. Paul, Minnesota, led to the enactment of a psychopathic offender law, which included LGBT people alongside rapists and child molesters. Though justified by the need to protect children and others from sexual abuse, those convicted of homosexuality constituted the major part of those imprisoned under it.〔
In ''State v. Blom'' (1984), the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that the criminal ban on sodomy also applied to the act of cunnilingus. A few years later in ''State v. Gray'' the Court rejected the argument that privacy rights applied to sodomy involving prostitution. However, the court did recognize that the State Constitution protected privacy rights, although it stopped short of stating whether or not private, adult, consensual and non-commercial sodomy was covered under the State Constitution's right to privacy.
In ''Doe et al. v. Ventura et al.'' (2001), Minneapolis Judge Delilah Pierce ruled that the sodomy law violated the State Constitution when dealing with private, adult, consensual and non-commercial sodomy. The ruling was later certified as being a class action lawsuit and the State did not appeal, thus voiding the law in terms of private, consensual, non-commercial acts of sodomy by consenting adults,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Doe vs. Ventura )〕 two years before ''Lawrence v. Texas''.

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「LGBT rights in Minnesota」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.