xxii ________________________ High Contracting Parties ________________________ xxii: Kingflounder - A Reputation Of Failing His Faith - Spouse

In The Beginning SINCE TIME BEGAN : Caveat : Forward Thinking Statement : Caveat : IN TRUTH WE TRUST Until Tomorrow

Caveat - Forward Thinking Statement - Caveat

12507091809 : APR 27TH, 2024 : 12507091809

Published By : Goodwin-RC : CEO +1News Central'Tis A Puzzlement It Is - This Adultery Matter - General Public Dismissive"The proverb “Those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones” is a clever reminder not to criticize others for flaws that we ourselves possess. It serves as a cautionary warning: if you throw stones at someone else’s house, you’re likely to have someone do the same to yours. The metaphor of a “glass house” emphasizes the fragility and instability of the stone-thrower’s position. Before they know it, their own vulnerabilities may be exposed 1 2 3"ANGER MANAGEMENT ARCHIVES"The last conviction for adultery in Massachusetts was in 1983 and held that the statute was constitutional and that "no fundamental personal privacy right implicit in the concept of ordered liberty guaranteed by the United States Constitution bars the criminal prosecution of such persons [adulterers]."^[98]""such violations [of the adultery statute], prosecutions by law enforcement officials are essentially nonexistent. . . . It seems beyond dispute that the [statute] defining or punishing the [crime] of . . . adultery . . . [has] fallen into a very comprehensive desuetude." Fort v. Fort, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 411, 416-417 (1981). See Loud v. Loud, 386 Mass. 473, 476 n.2. (1982). However, as the Appeals Court further noted: "To recognize that fact is not to say that [this statute has] become invalid or judicially unenforceable. See 2 Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction Section 34.06 (4th ed. 1973). District of Columbia v. John R. Thompson Co., 346 U.S. 100, 113-114 (1953)" (footnote omitted). Id. at 417. The failure to prosecute others is not presented by the legal questions reported in this case. The statute remains as a permissible expression of public policy. If any lack of prosecution of the crime of adultery indicates a general public disfavor with the statute, appropriate means exist to address such disfavor to the Legislature, which has the power to change or repeal the statute. See Commonwealth v. Brasher, 359 Mass. 550, 558 (1971). In the absence of a constitutional violation, we have no power to invalidate the statute.

Accordingly, we answer the reported questions as follows: (1) G. L. c. 272, Section 14, is not unconstitutional on its face; (2) G. L. c. 272, Section 14, is not unconstitutional as applied to the facts of the present case; (3) G. L. c. 272, Section 14, may be applied to consensual acts between adults in private."JUDGE MERCHAN'S RULE OF LAW COURTROOM : ARRESTING ASSETS INTO PUBLIC TRUST