The ACLU’s argument?
“The government cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Senator Craig was inviting the undercover officer to engage in anything other than sexual intimacy that would not have called attention to itself in a closed stall in the public restroom…”
The the ACLU’s argument is laughable on its face: “…sexual intimacy that would not have called attention to itself in a closed stall in the public restroom.” That it’s “supported” by a 38-year-old nonsensical Minnesota Supreme Court ruling is just icing on the cake.
Key word: “public.” Anyone imagine NOT being aware of sexual relations taking place in a “closed stall” one door over, what with four sets of feet, grunting and moaning and all the other acoutrements of getting it off? Pull the other one, doofuses. Heck, you don’t even have any real privacy when just taking a dump. (Splash, splash, gas, gas, “courtesy flush,” splash, splash… ) An “expectation of privacy” in a public facility is only present in folks who are idiots, loons or ACLU. (You guess which ones I consider the Minnesota Supreme Court of 38 years past.)
Now, if Craig had been busted in a hotel room, the ACLU would have had an argument.
THIS is an open trackbacks post. Link to THIS post and track back. 🙂
If you have a linkfest/open trackback post to promote OR if you simply want to promote a post via the linkfests/open trackback posts others are offering, GO TO LINKFEST HAVEN DELUXE! Just CLICK the link above or the graphic immediately below.
If you want to host your own linkfests but have not yet done so, check out the Open Trackbacks Alliance. The FAQ there is very helpful in understanding linkfests/open trackbacks.