aTypical Joe: a gay New Yorker living in the rural South

 

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Was Craig really guilty of lewd conduct?

Chris Crain notes that “the gay and leftie blogosphere is, of course, gleeful, as is practically every gay person I’ve talked to” and wonders why we “cheer on the politics of personal destruction.”

Crain quotes from the arrest report to tell the tale told by the officer seated in the airport restroom stall next to the fidgeting, crack-peaking, foot-tapping, hand-swiping Senator, to wonder, was Craig really guilty of lewd conduct?

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that Craig was somehow crudely indicating his sexual interest in Karsnia. The Supreme Court ruled in the landmark Lawrence vs. Texas decision that sex between consenting adults is constitutionally protected. Many states have correctly concluded that, as a result, solicitation of sodomy or other forms of sex, even when the conversation takes place in public, is also constitutionally protected. If conduct is constitutionally protected, then we have a First Amendment right to discuss it.

That protection falls by the wayside, as well it should, if Craig was not just soliciting a private sex act in a public place but actually intended for the sex itself to take place in public. Nowhere does the arrest report explain to us how Sgt. Krasnia made that leap of logic based on Craig’s foot-tapping and hand-swiping.

The arrest report does indicate that Craig was late for a flight, so it may well have been some odd form of quickie was what was on his mind. But it also reported that Craig identified himself as a regular commuter through the airport, so another explanation might be that he wanted to set up some later rendezvous.

Yes, I know that Craig pled guilty to the charge, and it’s on that point where he most clearly hoisted himself on his own petard. He was so afraid of how things would look that he lacked the nerve to defend himself and his rights - just as over the course of his life he lacked the nerve to accept his sexual orientation (whether bisexual or homosexual) and defend the rights of those who share those orientations.

The saddest part of the Larry Craig scandal to me is that it will only encourage and energize those who troll the sex lives of politicians in search of juicy slime to spread - as if that somehow makes the case for our equality. As for me, I don’t favor arguing I have a right to privacy in my choice of sexual partners by invading that right in others, even if they are our opponents, and even if they are hypocrites.

We should take no joy in the ruin of Larry Craig’s marriage and reputation - even if it is well deserved and a long time in coming. The man has known for two years now he was under intense scrutiny for rumors that he’s gay and has sex in public toilets. Not since Bill Clinton have we been treated to a public figure so compulsively unable to control the little head with the big one.

SEE ALSO, A touch too far: Public lewdness laws and Gays in bathrooms? Not so many.

Next entry: Vint Cerf predicts the end of TV as we know it Previous entry: IDAHomophobia rerun: homo homphobes
 

Recent Posts

Please leave a comment