A rat smells its own hole.
Posted on 01/16/2008 4:21:05 PM PST by wagglebee
MINNEAPOLIS, January 16, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The American Civil Liberties Union is arguing that men who have sex in public washrooms should be protected under court rulings guaranteeing privacy.
On Tuesday, the ACLU filed an amicus brief to the Minnesota 4th District Court citing a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling 38 years ago that found that people who have sex in closed stalls in public restrooms "have a reasonable expectation of privacy."
The brief was filed in defence of Republican Senator Larry Craig who was arrested and charged with lewd conduct in June 2007.
ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said, "The real motive behind secret sting operations like the one that resulted in Sen. Craig's arrest is not to stop people from inappropriate activity. It is to make as many arrests as possible - arrests that sometimes unconstitutionally trap innocent people." Solicitation for private sex is protected speech under the First Amendment, the ACLU argues.
Romero wrote, "If the police really want to stop people from having sex in public bathrooms, they should put up a sign banning sex in the restroom and send in a uniformed officer to patrol periodically. That works."
But Patrick Hogan of the Metropolitan Airports Commission said Monday that Craig's arrest and at least 41 similar arrests were made lawfully. "Engaging in public sex in a bathroom is a crime and most people understand that without putting up a sign," Hogan said.
"We saw a lot of communication about this particular bathroom on Web sites, and if we make it known that we're aware of it we can't be expected to enforce the law as effectively."
Hogan added, "We believe the charges fit the crime and Sen. Craig agreed to the charges as part of plea negotiations."
Craig, widely regarded before his arrest as a family-values conservative, was arrested for lewd conduct in a men's bathroom on June 11, 2007. He pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of disorderly conduct on August 8, 2007.
The ACLU's defence of homosexual sex in public will come as no surprise to those who have followed its years of work as one of the strongest supporters of the homosexual movement. It has also been in the forefront of the perennial efforts by secularists and the hard left to ban public displays of Christianity, particularly at Christmas. Nativity scenes and the Ten Commandments, mentions of God or Christian themes in public speeches at schools and colleges, and the teaching of alternatives to Darwinian theory have all come under attack from the organisation.
A movement opposing the anti-Christian and anti-family work of the ACLU is gaining steam in the US.
In 2006, the American Legion, the largest veterans organization in the US, called on the government to stop funding the ACLU's efforts to abolish traditional expressions of Christianity. District 21 Commander Rees Lloyd, on behalf of the Legion, testified to the Senate in support of a bill that would remove the power to award taxpayer-paid attorney fees to the ACLU.
"Benevolently intended fee provisions are being used as a bludgeon against public entities to surrender to ACLU's demands, and being used to obtain profits in the millions."
Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
American Legion Urges Senate to Protect Public Expression of Religion
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/aug/06080307.html
ACLU Founder a Communist Ideologue Bent on Uprooting Judeo-Christian Foundation of America
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/sep/05092102.html
I didn’t think you were defending it, I was just pointing out a very probable scenario.
“What two consenting adults do in the privacy of a restroom stall is.......”
Nothing but a bunch of sick freaks.
Who said you can’t get VD from a toilet seat??
This is disgusting.
A rat smells its own hole.
It would seem that the aclu has been infected with butt flu.And all this time I thought it was liberalism.
(Cue cheesy techno music).
When you are a Republican and the ACLU is trying to help you it is time to step down.
I have to check my files but I remember Romero as supporting various communist fronts and united fronts for many years.
I suspect that he has been in lawsuits with the marxist-created Center for Constitutional Rights, the National Lawyers Guild, and related leftist legal entities, as well as supporting the united anti-Iraq fronts of the WWP/ANSWER/IAC, and United for Peace & Justice. (Some lists of sponsors of these groups have removed from their websites. Wonder why?)
I’ll see what I can find.
Go get a room!
People should not be solicited for homosexual sex in a public facility.
OMFG!
How about if somebody starts a lawsuit to allow sex on the desks at the ACLU offices?... /s
“Solicitation for private sex is protected speech under the First Amendment, the ACLU argues.”
Let’s examine this a little closer.
Soliciting sex is often called “prostitution” if money is exchanged.
“Protected speech”? Something else should be protected.
How can you have “protected speech” if your mouth is full? Not saying anything, are you? Therefore, no “speech”, protected or unprotected.
Isn’t this the best way to spread veneral disease? Thus the ACLU is promoting unsafe and dangerous sexual practices that pose a danger to the public. Therefore they are “aiding and abetting” criminal behavior and dangerous health behavior.
Somebody call the CDC on these leftist a*holes. Oh, I forgot, that is what the ACLU is protecting.
Re the “if”. No one knows what goes on “behind closed doors” (sorry, Charlie Pride).
Some of these chickenhawks ain’t out there doing this for pleasure.
I have nothing against viruses except, like communists and Islamofascist, they can kill you.
Besides, all that, you have no idea what is on that toilet seat. As my granddaughter would say, it’s “disgusting, yukey, nasty.”
I guess the ACLU’s theme is “I’ll protect your rights to bend over, anywhere, anytime, with anyone.”
"We saw a lot of communication about this particular bathroom on Web sites, and if we make it known that we're aware of it we can't be expected to enforce the law as effectively."
Is the goal to "enforce the law", or end the conduct? This statement makes it sound like the preferred outcome for the LE community is an arrest rather than a voluntary choice to not engage in disgusting behavior. I guess the argument is that if they somehow got the word out that this place was under surveillance, the pervs would just go elsewhere. But that is what happens anyway after arrests are made.
Well, gollllleeee, Sargeant Carter! Isn’t that just great?
I love it when you talk “legal”.
I’m a paralegal in one of my incarnations. The govt actually calls me a “historian” but I’m still a research paralegal at heart (environmental CERCLA cases). But no “cite checking” for me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.