The Difference Between Government And Organized Crime

Robert Gehl reports the left is edging closer and closer toward a world where there are two classes of people: Rapists and rape victims.

The regulation of sexual behavior – so far isolated to colleges and universities, where men are increasingly being viewed as sexual predators – is about to move into the “real world.”

The American Law Institute (ALI), an organization of lawyers, judges and legal scholars, is about to vote on a change to their “Model Penal Code” and recognize “affirmative consent” as a legal standard.

The ALI’s code is so influential that state legislators and local jurisdictions often vote their recommended changes into law as is, without much discussion or dissent.

Next month, the ALI will vote whether or not to adopt “affirmative consent” as official policy of the organization. This is the “yes-means-yes” standard that requires verbal consent for each and every progressive sexual event leading up to and including intercourse.

It would also criminalize a host of seemingly innocuous sexual encounters as “sexual touching” or “sexual violence.”

In a letter written by several ALI members opposing this rule change, they laid out a scenario:

“Person A and Person B are on a date and walking down the street. Person A, feeling romantically and sexually attracted, timidly reaches out to hold B’s hand and feels a thrill as their hands touch. Person B does nothing, but six months later files a criminal complaint. Person A is guilty of ‘Criminal Sexual Contact’.”

Why is hand-holding sexual contact? Because under the Model Penal Code, “Any kind of contact may qualify [as sexual touching],” whether clothed or unclothed. As long as there is “sexual gratification in mind,” it’s “sexual touching.”

Not only that, but turning the “no-means-no” into “yes-means-yes” standard for sexual assault and rape will undoubtedly make everyone who is sexually active either a rapist or a victim.

The code demands a “yes” answer – either verbally or through “unambiguous non-verbal cues” to questions like: “May I kiss you now?” “May I touch you here?” “May I kiss you there?”

Nobody has sex like this. Not even the folks at ALI who are considering the change.

The code also states that if the victim is inebriated, then any sexual contact even with consent is not consent, and is therefore rape.

What percent of married people can now be categorized not as a loving couple but as “rapist” and “victim.” Ask my beautiful wife of 16 years how many times we’ve had “sexual touching” after she’s had a few glasses of wine. Nevermind. Don’t do that.

Advocates of these codes make two arguments: Women (mostly women … they try to claim it’s also a men’s issue, but it’s not) must be protected from sexual assault and requiring women to actively resist is not enough.

Their second argument is that no prosecutor would waste their time on a frivolous case like the hand-holding scenario described above. But once a law is passed, you have no control over how it is used. Overzealous prosecutors looking to convict someone could fall back on these “lesser” charges to convince a suspect to plead guilty.

The ALI wants to criminalize sexual conduct considered unsavory, not illegal or necessarily even immoral in many cases.

The left is leading us down a slippery slope where our bedroom antics and plot lines for romantic comedies are the subject of onerous criminal codes and everyone is either a criminal or a victim.

Two classes of people: Those to be shunned and those to be protected.

Where will you fall?

Recently Posted