Jump to content

groupsex ok in the great white north


T.T Boy

Recommended Posts

OTTAWA - Group sex among consenting adults is neither prostitution nor a threat to society, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled on Wednesday as it lifted a ban on so-called “swingers� clubs.

 

In a ruling that radically changes the way courts determine what poses a threat to the population, the top court threw out the conviction of a Montreal man who ran a club where members could have group sex in a private room behind locked doors.

 

“Consensual conduct behind code-locked doors can hardly be supposed to jeopardize a society as vigorous and tolerant as Canadian society,� said the opinion of the seven-to-two majority, written by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin.

 

The decision does not affect laws against prostitution because no money changed hands among the adults having sex.

 

‘Bawdy house’ proprietor's appeal

The court was reviewing an appeal by Jean-Paul Labaye, who ran the L’Orage (Thunderstorm) club. He had been convicted in 1999 of running a “bawdy house� — defined as a place where prostitution or acts of public indecency took place.

 

Labaye — who is still running L’Orage despite his earlier conviction — said he was relieved, and would now go ahead with a new venture with backing from a group of Florida investors.

 

“We hope clients will be more calm. This will probably lead the way to a good future,� he told reporters, saying he was looking at adding a Jacuzzi and a swimming pool.

 

Labaye said he had about 2,000 regular clients who paid around $20 ($17 U.S.) a year for a membership card.

 

Lawyers for Labaye and the owner of another swingers’ club in Montreal argued that consensual sex among groups of adults behind closed doors was neither indecent or a risk to society.

 

The Supreme Court judges agreed.

 

“Criminal indecency or obscenity must rest on actual harm or a significant risk of harm to individuals or society. The Crown failed to establish this essential element of the offense. (Its) case must therefore fail,� McLachlin wrote.

 

In indecency cases, Canadian courts have traditionally probed whether the acts in question “breached the rules of conduct necessary for the proper functioning of society�. The Supreme Court ruled that from now on, judges should pay more attention to whether society would be actively harmed.

 

Deviant, maybe, but not dangerous

This seemed to ensure there could be no repeat of Labaye’s original conviction for causing “social harm� by allowing degrading and dehumanizing group sex to take place.

 

The judges said that just because most Canadians might disapprove of swingers’ clubs, this did not necessarily mean the establishments were socially dangerous.

 

“The causal link between images of sexuality and anti-social behavior cannot be assumed. Attitudes in themselves are not crimes, however deviant they may be or disgusting they may appear,� the judges said, noting that no one had been pressured to have sex or had paid for sex in the cases the court considered.

 

“The autonomy and liberty of members of the public was not affected by unwanted confrontation with the sexual activity in question ... only those already disposed to this sort of sexual activity were allowed to participate and watch,� they said.

 

They also dismissed the idea — raised during Labaye’s original trial — that group sex was dangerous because it could result in the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.

 

“Sex that is not indecent can transmit disease while indecent sex might not,� they ruled.

 

Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.

 

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10561253/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
Originally posted by mackfatsoe@Dec 27 2005, 07:50 PM

Complaining about tyra's fivehead is like bitching about how you don't like your new Rolls Royce anymore because there's a dime sized stain underneath the front seat.

 

 

that's usually when I hit the dealership for a trade in..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

also, I would have Trya's babies..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Sparoism

The Power Exchange is a FUCKING FREAK FACTORY.

 

My friend lived around the corner from there, and we would see some really funny shit, just sitting on the front porch.

 

After a while, we'd got tired of heckling (no one specifically, just whoever caught our eye) and smoke dust till the sun came up..and when the place would let out after special events....we'd heckle some more.

 

We were usually at least five deep, and the dude who lived there weighed about 300 pounds, so we rarely got called out...one time this chick said something, so he took off his shirt, and showed her all of his prison tats. I think after that we pretty much had free rein.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no way in hell that I would be part of sex with any more than one other person.

 

I recently turned down a threesome, I've never had a threesome, but I didn't like the idea....

 

I mean, yeah sure, that sounds stupid to most all of you, but that's just the way I am...

 

I like to concentrate on giving ONE girl 5-8 orgasms per session.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...