Florida Accidentally Bans Sex

Hmm. Interesting. Makes me wanna go there just to break the law. That'd be a thrill.
 
While the law will obviously never be interpreted as that, it's still lolworthy.
 
Boy am I glad I live here in the Netherlands...

I do hope there won't be any lawsuits because of this.
 
The "not so" link on that page says

The problem with this interpretation is that the statute itself explicitly distinguishes between "persons" and "animals," prohibiting sex acts between the two groups. A court facing a question of interpreting the statute would almost certainly read the statute's use of the term "animals" as "non-human animals," both to avoid absurdity and to conform with (1) the intent of the drafters; (2) the purpose of the statute; and (3) a commonly used (if scientifically inaccurate) understanding of the term 'animal" to exclude humans.
Click to expand...

So.... not really.
 
[PokeCommunity.com] Florida Accidentally Bans Sex


Just shows how stupid some people can be these days. I can't believe this is actually a real ban.
 
Damn, that was the longest article I've ever read. tl;dr version please?

But no, seriously, I'd like to see exactly what the wording was, that turned "Prevent Bestiality, Acquire Animal Welfare", to "No sex allowed". Is it even physically possible to screw up the wording that bad?

Also...

[PokeCommunity.com] Florida Accidentally Bans Sex
 
Last edited:
Azure Revolver said:
But no, seriously, I'd like to see exactly what the wording was, that turned "Prevent Bestiality, Acquire Animal Welfare", to "No sex allowed". Is it even physically possible to screw up the wording that bad?
Click to expand...
Here.
According to that law:

"A person may not:
(a) Knowingly engage in any sexual conduct or sexual
contact with an animal;
(b) Knowingly cause, aid, or abet another person to engage
in any sexual conduct or sexual contact with an animal;
(c) Knowingly permit any sexual conduct or sexual contact
with an animal to be conducted on any premises under his or her
charge or control; or
(d) Knowingly organize, promote, conduct, advertise, aid,
abet, participate in as an observer, or perform any service in
the furtherance of an act involving any sexual conduct or sexual
contact with an animal for a commercial or recreational purpose."
Humans are technically animals, and the only correct interpretation is to count them as such. The moral of the story, is if you want to have sex, you better not know about it.
 
The should keep it on the books, that way it wont be enforced but will be a source of laughs in the future.

Like the laws saying you can't get a fish drunk, or that you can't walk on your hands.
 
That law reminds me of another law made in Malawi: No farting in public. Seriously, are politicians brain-damaged?
 
I swear, most of the people in this thread haven't read what it actually says. It's just a sorta miswording that wasn't meant to ban sex between humans and which would never be interpreted as such. lol.
 
Because the distinction between "persons" and "animals" was never made, right?

I'm sure most people who read it would know better. Just a bit of common sense.
 
Landorus said:
The should keep it on the books, that way it wont be enforced but will be a source of laughs in the future.

Like the laws saying you can't get a fish drunk, or that you can't walk on your hands.
Click to expand...

Or possibly no whaling in Oklahoma? THERE ARE NO WHALES IN OKLAHOMA IDIOTS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top