Thursday, April 21, 2005

A Naked Act of Resistance

Oh, this man has some courage - Chutzpah, I think...but he does have point.


As the student who asked Justice Scalia about his sexual conduct, I am responding to your posts to explain why I believe I had a right to confront Justice Scalia in the manner I did Tuesday, why any gay or sympathetic person has that same right. It should be clear that I intended to be offensive, obnoxious, and inflammatory. There is a time to discuss and there are times when acts and opposition are necessary. Debate is useless when one participant denies the full dignity of the other. How am I to docilely engage a man who sarcastically rants about the "beauty of homosexual relationships" [at the Q&A] and believes that gay school teachers will try to convert children to a homosexual lifestyle [in oral argument for Lawrence]?

Although my question was legally relevant, as I explain below, an independent motivation for my speech-act was to simply subject a homophobic government official to the same indignity to which he would subject millions of gay Americans. It was partially a naked act of resistance and a refusal to be silenced. I wanted to make him and everyone in the room aware of the dehumanizing effect of trivializing such an important relationship. Justice Scalia has no pity for the millions of gay Americans on whom sodomy laws and official homophobia have such an effect, so it is difficult to sympathize with his brief moment of "humiliation," as some have called it. The fact that I am a law student and Scalia is a Supreme Court Justice does not require me to circumscribe my justified opposition and outrage within the bounds of jurisprudential discourse.

Law school and the law profession do not negate my identity as a member of an oppressed minority confronting injustice...

If you cannot stomach a breach of decorum when justified outrage erupts then your support is nearly worthless anyway. At least do not allow yourselves to become complicit in discrimination by demanding obedience from its victims...

We protestors did not embarrass NYU, Scalia embarrassed NYU. We stood up to a bigot for the values that make NYU more than a great place to learn the law. I repeat my willingess to discuss this issue calmly with anyone who respects my identity as a gay man. I have had many productive talks with classmates since Tuesday and I hope that will continue.

End slice:

Debatable or not, the only enforcement of sodomy laws will no doubt be prosocuted on homosexual couples and not heterosexual couples, thus making the law constitutionally unbalanced. You can't descriminate. If sodomy is to be against the law, that must mean for all combinations of couples, not just the one's you don' t like.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Scalia enjoyed it

Scalia and Opus Dei
Radicals on the High Court


"After I joined they gave me a barbed wire chain to wear on my leg for two hours a day and a whip to hit my buttocks with."

Sharon Clasen, former member of Opus Dei

"Blessed be pain. Loved be pain. Glorified be pain"

Josemarie Escriva, Founder, Opus Dei

Click for more.