The post-mortem on the Ken Cuccinelli loss is in full swing. Naturally, the loudest of those claim Cuccinelli lost because of his social conservatism, in particular, Cuccinelli's defense of Virginia's "Crimes Against Nature" (sodomy) law, specifically Sec. A, in the courts. Naturally, wildly dishonest speculation about Cuccinelli's defense of this law led the worst to complain about how he would use this law to prosecute not only homosexuals but heterosexuals as well, even though it was supposedly overturned by Lawrence v. Texas back in 2003. The truth about his defense shows otherwise, and really displays the despicably dishonest hackery by those working to get the reprehensible and crooked Terry McAuliffe elected governor, and that includes the Establishment GOP. What was the worst is that a gay legal advocacy group helped put Virginia's children in danger of being targeted by sexual predators by getting the courts to redefine sodomy to suit their purposes. (A month ago, the Supreme Court decided to allow the 4th Circuit's decision to overturn the law to stand by not hearing Cuccinelli's appeal.)
Back in 2004, a 40-something man named McDonald solicited sex from two different 17-year old girls on two different occasions, including getting them to give him oral sex. The relations were consensual and the girls were not prostitutes (he didn't pay for the sex). He was eventually arrested and convicted of violating the sodomy law because of the oral sex; he couldn't be convicted of statutory rape since in Virginia, the age of consent is 15. But under Virginia law, the girls were definitely considered minors. McDonald appealed his conviction in state and federal courts; every single appeal failed in the state courts, including the Virginia Supreme Court, and failed in the federal district court for the District of Eastern Virginia. However, a panel of the 4th Circuit, made up of two Clinton appointees and one Obama appointee, reversed the District Court decision in a 2 - 1 ruling; interestingly, the Obama appointee dissented and wrote an excellent dissenting opinion (beginning on page 22 of the PDF linked above) about how wrong the majority was. Included in McDonald's defense were Erwin Chemerinsky, the extremist Democrat "law" "professor", the ACLU (naturally), and the Lambda Legal Foundation, the gay legal advocacy group. As mentioned earlier, the Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal and the panel ruling stands.
The "argument" that "won" the day for McDonald, and every other sexual predator in Virginia, was the erroneous use of Lawrence v. Texas which threw out Texas' sodomy laws. Apparently, the Court doesn't read its own rulings. Judge Diaz (the Obama appointee), in his dissent, repeatedly cited Lawrence showing how it was only relevant on an as applied basis, that is when a sodomy law was used against consenting adults. Diaz showed where in Lawrence how that ruling would not apply when used to prosecute sex crimes against minors; in other words, Lawrence did not facially (completely) overturn every sodomy laws in the states that have them. At least not until a month ago.
I apologize ahead of time for soiling RedState with the next link. The filthy regessives at (No)Think(No)Progress put together an "analysis" with which to attack Cuccinelli and blame him for not "fixing" laws protecting minors from sexual predators in Virginia after Lawrence when he was a legislator. While Virginia has not, for years, attempted to prosecute any consenting adults for violating its sodomy law, the law has been used successfully for prosecuting sexual predators who targeted minors between 15- and 17-years old. But after Lawrence, there was a worry the statute would not hold up in court and work commenced to make changes. However, the only change tried was to say the kind of violations that convicted McDonald would only occur when it happened in a public place. Nowhere is there any indication this stops sexual predators like McDonald. In any event, the changes in question passed through a committee in the Virginia Senate, but that Cuccinelli (and his successor as AG) voted against it. It doesn't say why, but I would make an educated guess that there were no reasons for the changes as they would be ineffectual. The bill eventually died in some committee that has to review new bills.
So what Virginia ended up with is a new definition of sodomy, as specified by the verminous gay advocates, along with pig Democrats masquerading as law professors and the ACLU. In effect, sodomy has been redefined such that it could only occur when done by consenting adults, and therefore is a protected right under the Constitution (a fabrication created by Lawrence). If sexual predators want to target minors and not be subject to statutory rape laws, they are now free to do so in Virginia without consequence. The people who advocated for McDonald and helped get McAuliffe elected allowed this to happen. And yet, these pedophile-enablers dare to call Cuccinelli extreme. I spit at them. And like I said, the Supreme Court decided, by refusing to hear Cuccinelli's appeal, to overturn those parts of Lawrence when sodomy with a minor is involved.
The regressives at (No)Think(No)Progress said the full story about Cuccinelli's defense of Virginia's laws was "far more nuanced" and they were right about that. The regressives themselves committed a lie of omission because they refused to see that the post-Lawrence changes would have no effect against sexual predators like McDonald. And, because Cuccinelli does not believe in same-sex "marriage" nor personally condone homosexual acts, his Democrat and Establishment GOP opponents never once defended the truth of Cuccinelli's defense of the sodomy law as applied.
But what would one expect from those willing to lie down with the Democrat dogs to allow these filthy Democrats to continue to promote further deviancy. Add child endangerment to that list.