Larry Craig's arrest
Garance Franke-Ruta has a good backgrounder (actually, several) on the law pertaining to Senator Craig's arrest (and subsequent guilty plea for disorderly conduct) for gay solicitation in an airport bathroom in June. It's hard to sympathize with Senator Craig, and I wouldn't really care about his fate had his secret life been revealed through other means than an arrest report. But given that the details of his arrest look pretty dodgy (why exactly should propositioning somebody in a bathroom, particularly following a code that must have been well known to cruisers and likely fairly innocuous to everyone else, be illegal?), it makes me pretty uncomfortable to see a career and probably also a marriage and social life destroyed in this way.
Update: Well, I'm not getting any contrarian points for this given that apparently the entire staff of Slate seems to agree.
Update: Well, I'm not getting any contrarian points for this given that apparently the entire staff of Slate seems to agree.
2 Comments:
The fact that Craig has consistently voted against any legal protections for gay citizens has contributed to the illegal bathroom sex venue. I realize there is some thrillseeking fun in public sex, but the police in a busy airport are asked to clean up the illegal activities in a public place that is intended for all ages to use. If a person enters that place and engages in well-understood coded behavior that would otherwise lead to a crime, and then pleads guilty to that offense -- not to mention trying to use his Senate business card for intimidation or mitigation -- why not throw the weight of the law at him?
He has contributed an environment that drives gays into the shadows, increasing the likelihood of public places being used for private activities, all while engaging in those activities. And he didn't even tell his wife he had been arrested and pleaded guilty?
I don't think the Senator deserves your discomfort. It seems to me that Slate and others are framing this through their attitudes -- that his behavior was harmless and was part of a consensual activity -- while if he had been asked to weigh in on cruising in an airport bathroom, his voting record suggests he would not be as charitable as you are.
apc--
Ya, but.....going back to first principles, two wrongs just, well, don't make things right.
.
Post a Comment
<< Home