October 27, 2007

Craig to claim sex sting arrest, though ghey, was unconstitutional

Says his foot-tapping in mensroom stall was gay come-on protected speech

Idaho's so not gay Sen. Larry Craig will not go away, this time arguing before an appeals court that Minnesota's disorderly conduct law is unconstitutional as it applies to his conviction, according to a new court filing.

This is the first time Craig's attorneys have raised that issue. However, an earlier filing by the American Civil Liberties Union argued that Craig's foot-tapping, hand gestures and cock-grabbing under a stall divider at the Minneapolis airport are protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

You know, being the card-carying ACLU member that I am (ie; a commie/pinko/Murica-hatin/pre-vert), I actually think that there MAY be a case of sorts to be made for 'free speech' or 9th amendment rights. Ultimately, I've always felt that people should be able to say/ask/express themselves (short of falsely yelling "Fire" in a theatre, or knowingly spreading false info -- like the Neo-cons & their squawk-radio minions often do) without fear of arrest. If some guy in a john thinks he's making a 'love connection' with somebody, they're both adults, and he wants to ask him about exploring it further... well, that should NOT be a police matter in my mind. Same as a guy approaching a woman in a public place and putting the moves on her. If he inquires and he's told 'no' but keeps pursuing it -- verbally or physically -- then it should start to verge into a 'disturbing the peace', just as what can happen if you 'over-argue' with a retailer, let's say. To me, it should be handled the same as any other soliciter -- Amway, Watkins, Scientology, Morman/LDS, etc

What's SO objectionable about all this Craig episode is that he and these other righties consistently vote AGAINST free and open rights(as well as approval of judges and appointees who are like-minded) for non-violent actions in our society (also see: the 'War on Drugs') for their pandering political purposes while they themselves practice these same acts - - AND THEN WANT THE LEGAL PROTECTIONS THEY VOTED AGAINST! It's the fucking height of hypocrisy and they DESERVE to be castigated relentlessly for it, no matter which party they're from! One of the BIG problems with hypocritcal acts like this is that its VERY confusing for society at large - - nobody REALLY knows what these politicians stand for, other than that they'll say anything to get elected. It obviously makes it very difficult to have an effective government with actions like these, and leads to the political cynicism/non-participation that the US experiences.

Anonymous said...

Big Em, I'm sorry but I can't agree that men having sex in a public restroom is a "freedom" - not when other people have to see it/listen to them. Asking for it, yes - but the doing is a police matter.

Anonymous said...

::MWAH:: I agree that sexual relations (something more than the hugging/kissing that is freely done in public, in this country at least) between consenting adults in the US should be done in private, or face misdemeanor charges for public exposure/indecency, etc. (Interesting, though isn't it, how it's legal -- even encouraged around this Halloween time -- to portray people doing HORRIBLY VIOLENT things to each other [murder graphically portrayed, disembowling, dismembering, etc] but it's ILLEGAL to depict even a woman's breast/nipple [ala Janet Jackson] much less sexual intimacy, even when positively portrayed. Also, when you read about some of the older cultures, like Eskimos, where they would engage in sexual relations in a communal setting in view of family members, with no ill effects on anyone, it does make one wonder if our taboos are a bit inverted?)

However, from what little I know of this whole Larry Craig episode (I have to admit that I DON'T care to become an expert on these 'Republican restroom initiated romances'), it was unclear to me as to WHERE Larry wanted to have his tryst... restroom, parking structure, off-premises?

My primary point is that I believe that adults in the US should have the right to TALK about virtually anything, even about actions that IF PERFORMED are illegal. When the discussion moves into ACTION (of which I would include making concrete plans to do something illegal, with times/dates/tasks/etc), that's when it MAY potentially become a police/legal matter, especially if it concerns violence.

Anonymous said...

free speech? he shouldn't talk with his mouth full....

Anonymous said...

When erectile dysfunction affects your sexual life, it also affects your personal life as well. With as many as 20% of men afflicted with erectile dysfunction at some time in their lives, it is a problem worth addressing. There are many ways to take care of erectile dysfunction from pumps to pills, but levitra is best way of bringing a solution to either your temporary or permanent erectile dysfunction. http://www.besthealthmed.com/working_of_levitra.html