community-based, non-corporate, participatory media

About Contact Us Policies Mailing Lists Radio Video Publish! Calendar Search

View article without comments

CALL TO ACTION: Sodomy Laws, the Supreme Court and Santorum
by David Meieran Friday, Jun. 13, 2003 at 2:15 PM 412-421-7716

Pittsburgh to join 17 cities in a national day of protest around historic Supreme Court sodomy ruling



WHAT: National day of protest in response to historic U.S. Supreme Court ruling on sodomy law.

WHEN: EITHER 5:00pm, Monday, June 16 OR Monday, June 23 -- the day the U.S. Supreme Court hands down its ruling.

WHERE: Sentator Santorum's office at 1 Station Square...if the Court votes "no" we will then snake march to the U.S. District Court building at Liberty & Grant. As of June 13, 2003, at least 17 cities are participating in the action.

WHO: The Pittsburgh protest is being called by RESYST and the Rosenberg Institute for Peace and Justice.

WHY: In 1986 a Georgia sodomy law was challenged all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in Bowers v. Hardwick. The Court ruled 5-4 against Hardwick, a major milestone in history of queer liberation. Ever since that case, courts and legislators have used the excuse of the Hardwick decision to take children away from same-sex couples, to deny equal access to jobs, housing, public accommodations and more.

Now, 17 years later, the Supreme Court has a chance to revisit the Hardwick decision in Lawrence v. Texas. The plaintiffs contend that the sodomy law should be struck down not only on privacy grounds, but also because it violates the Equal Protection Clause by permitting sexual intimacy only for heterosexual couples and therefore turns queers into a sexless second class with less rights than other citizens. Texas' District Attorney argues that the law is aimed at protecting marriage, family, and children asserts the state's right to regulate any and all sexual practices, even those taking place behind closed doors and among consenting adults.

Texas is one of 13 remaining states that still have sodomy laws on the books; in the past 30 years, many states' sodomy laws were either repealed by state legislation or else invalidated by state courts. Pennsylvania's sodomy law was struck down by the PA State Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Bonadio, 415 A.2d 47 (1980).

Recall that earlier this year PA Sentator Santorum defended the Texas sodomy law and argued that homosexual consensual sex "undermine[s] the fabric of our society." Whether or not the Supreme Court rules in favor of Lawrence, it is important to continue to pressure Santorum and those who would use their private morality to enforce sodomy laws and institutionalized discrimination.

This historic case will affect the rights and lives of LGBT people for years to come. The Supreme Court is expected to announce its decision on either Monday, June 16 or Monday, June 23. Their ruling can go either way.

See for more info.

add your comments

no decision
by David Monday, Jun. 16, 2003 at 1:58 PM

no decision today...most likely next monday (6/23)

add your comments

Jesus Butbanging Christ
by George K. Monday, Jun. 16, 2003 at 3:47 PM

NOw we have the "pink Star" symbol? Laughable...
If you idiots actually read Santorums comments in fulle context, he was basically making your argument. He said (to summarize) that these types of laws are uncessesary and unenforcable. His comments were taken out of context, as is so often done by most press organizations for most public officials.
Yes, he DID inject his personal opinion. I hold the same opinions of those lifestyles, BUT i also know that people have the right to choose their lifestyles. Your group should pick better battles. This campaign is and ultimately will be ineffectual.
The general public is tired of hearing about "homo-angst". I don't mean go back in the closet, but stop forcing the issue on people. You only create hostile backlash.

add your comments

A Battle Worth Fighting
by Zachary Morris Tuesday, Jun. 17, 2003 at 9:42 AM

If there has ever been a fight worth fighting, it is now. I will not sit back and watch the government tell me that I have no right to go 2 hole on some fat broad in the private confines of my Impala's back seat. What's next, are we to outlaw the donkey punch? Take away the Dirty Sanchez? NOT ON MY WATCH, MISTER!!!

add your comments

Comments need not be taken out of context.
by Sara Landis Tuesday, Jun. 17, 2003 at 1:12 PM

George, I think perhaps you should revisit Santorum's original comments. Your summary is inaccurate.

SANTORUM: We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose. Because, again, I would argue, they undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does.

You say, well, it's my individual freedom. Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that's antithetical to strong, healthy families. Whether it's polygamy, whether it's adultery, where it's sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family.

In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality _

AP: I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about "man on dog" with a United States senator, it's sort of freaking me out.

Santorum's comments need not be taken out of context, his intentions are clear. A man and a woman participating in a monogamous relationship in which children are the product, does not ensure this family is strong and healthy. Husbands leave their wives, wives leave their husbands, spouses abuse one another and their children, all within the confines of "traditional" heterosexual relationships.

The argument that the repeal of sodomy laws opens up the field for other "deviant" behavior is ridiculous because most states don't even have them any more, and I seriously doubt there are more sexual deviants in Pennsylvania than in Texas.

Santorum says that he is not against homosexuals, simply homosexual acts. If queers remain celibate all their lives, the institution of the family will be preserved? This is political fence sitting at best.

Because Mr. Santorum does not know of any societies which have ever included homosexuality in marriage does not mean it never has been, only that he is ignorant of the subject. Let us recall ancient Greece, the true birthplace of democracy, which recognized homosexual couples. Even the Catholic Church performed marriage rites for same sex couples for over a millenia.

Could we please stop wasting time and tax dollars legislating who is permitted to fuck whom and invest it in more worthwhile ventures.

add your comments

by Prodigal Yunzer Wednesday, Jun. 18, 2003 at 7:06 PM

In the city which the "Pittsburgh Platter" was named after, it is astonishing that the local anarchist poet community has not offered gratuitous and semi public sodomy to show Santorum that he cannot control our hole. Let the Summer Of Dirty Love begin! I have my eye on a couple of those not so angry feminists at 1887, and if they would like to symbolically EFF THE MAN I would be gratified to play my small part in that action.

add your comments

Forcing the issue
by Theo Thursday, Jun. 19, 2003 at 9:01 AM

George, i hardly think that queers are 'forcing the issue'. Sodomy laws exist, we didn't creat them. When the police entered a Texas man's home and arrested him for having sex, i would say that Texas law enforcement forced the issue on him, and by extension, the rest of us. We will never have change if we just sit back and wait for people to suddenly decide that they like us.

add your comments

Hey Yunzer
by ARA dude Thursday, Jun. 19, 2003 at 11:18 AM

FUCK OFF!!! you are a pain in the ass and your comments are worthless

add your comments

ARA Dude
by Prodigal Yunzer Thursday, Jun. 19, 2003 at 1:20 PM

You know you want it.

add your comments

Sodomy demonstration
by Falco Thursday, Jun. 19, 2003 at 2:05 PM

Now let's be reasonable, I like this idea of Yunzer's. . . just imagine the marketing:

"It's an orgy!"
"No, it's a sodomy demonstration!"
"Sodomy Demonstration!"

Now now, kids, relax. . . you're both right! This Sunday, bring your wives, girlfriends, sisters, and if you're under the age of 25 and are a first born child, you can even bring your mothers! Now, where and when can you find this groundbreaking event??? At none other than the O at 10 O Clock. I know what you are saying, Hey, the O doesn't open till 11! Well, rest assured, the O has agreed to open itself for all of us to come into at 10 O clock so long as we take turns. Refreshments will be served. . . you can just reach around the corner and grab some pie whenever you want. Afterwards, we will congregate outside the O in a large circle, and we will send a picture of our oversized O Ring to the Supreme Court.

add your comments

The "O"?
by a real yinzer Thursday, Jun. 19, 2003 at 3:18 PM

I thought the "O" was just for pampered wannabee "gangsta" frat-boys to pick up some "street cred" and freedom fries before moving back to the country.

add your comments

by Falco Thursday, Jun. 19, 2003 at 3:32 PM

Yes, but I figured where can you find a better symbol for the butt than a place called The O.

add your comments

Fraternity row
by a real yinzer Thursday, Jun. 19, 2003 at 3:49 PM

Those frathouses near CMU would be good, all that male-bonding, kinky hazing and greek love...

add your comments

But Santorum is Intolerant
by Prodigal Yunzer Thursday, Jun. 19, 2003 at 4:59 PM

Of homosex. We in the anarchist poet community can make allusions to male bonding and Greek love. And thats not denigrating gays, no not in the least.

That's cause we're better than Santorum and other conservatives who have worthless comments. We're enlightened!

<pat pat pat myself on my grungy back>

add your comments

Intolerant? Yu kno rede gud
by a real yinzer Friday, Jun. 20, 2003 at 9:53 AM

Pointing out the obvious homoerotic components of certain aspects of so-called "straight" society is intolerant? Hits a little too close to home for you, honey?Would if it had been boy bands or studio wrestling? The chickenhawk obsession with the opinions of wise TV "daddies" like O'Reilly & Hannity? Bush and Trent Lott cheerleading during Vietnam?How do you know I don't fantasize about looking down and seeing a sparkling white baseball cap bobbing in time to the Dave Matthews Band, after a frat mixer? Ritual initiatory teabagging and spanking are still against dead baby fetishist Santorum's vision for America. Like the Nazis they emulate, the Bush crime family is into some kinky, kniky shit. Ashcroft is into something so heavy that he is offended by the breast on a statue. He has some major hangups. There probably isn't even a website for what he's into.
Give into your feelings. You may be able to hide from others behind your key board, but yunzer(sic) you can't hide from yourself. The penis envy you display when describing your big fast vehicles and your fear of women raise some questions...

add your comments

OK You Win
by Prodigal Yunzer Friday, Jun. 20, 2003 at 10:27 AM

Studio wrestling? Wow you are a real yunzer. Alright I will give in to my feelings, if you want me to pop your can at the SodoMania I guess I'll try in in the spirit of things. One thing I know from experience; I can be as gay as I want to be. And so will you. Be as gay as I want you to be, I mean.

add your comments

supreme court action update: June 23 or June 26
by david Friday, Jun. 20, 2003 at 1:19 PM

here's a letter that updates the situation:

"Dear Supreme Court celebration/protest organizers,

Fortunately a Supreme Court decision on the Texas case did not come down earlier this week, as it has given us the opportunity to formally welcome more cities into this nationwide effort -- WELCOME Fairbanks, Galveston, and Milwaukee!  That makes 29 cities and counting! 

Please note that court watchers at Lambda Legal and elsewhere now view a decision as most likely being announced on either Monday, June 23rd or Thursday, June 26th.

The announcement of the court decision will be a nationwide press event. But beyond that, the confluence of some 29+ rallies around the country will make the responses themselves a nationwide press event. As such, they will provide us with a unique opportunity to get our message out to our community and beyond, and thus it is important that we think through clearly what are the most appropriate and effective things to say.

To help prepare ourselves for what to say at our rallies on the evening of the decision, and what to say to our local press, we have prepared the following SUGGESTED talking points. We say "suggested," because we believe that at the end of the day, local organizers should have control over their actions, and not be dictated to from anyone. So while we hope you agree to use these talking points, ultimately you control the message of your celebration/protest. 

Among our most important suggestions is that people be prepared to say a few things about the upcoming Michigan Affirmative Action decision, which could be made on the same day as the Texas decision.  Even though this is not specifically an "LGBT issue," it directly affects a huge proportion of our community (women + racial minorities), and the civil rights climate for one group of people directly impacts the civil rights climate for all.  We hope you will agree that we need to address this.

Andy Thayer and Robin Tyler"

add your comments

Rectal Rodeo Rebukes Republican Retrenchment
by Prodigal Yunzer Friday, Jun. 20, 2003 at 11:16 PM

We are trying to organize a Gay Rodeo and Squaredance to support the Lambda Legal confluence. Come on down to the gay square dance with a big ole zipper in the back of your pants. Allaman left , allaman right, all a man needs is a pillow to bite!
Rump wranglers and nancy boys with chaps on and no britches underneath welcome.

add your comments

update: June 26 or June 30
by david Monday, Jun. 23, 2003 at 11:01 AM

The supreme court did not rule on the sodomy case today. The next most likely date for a decision is Thursday, June 26, although it is possible they might announce on ANY weekday between now and June 30. The minute we hear we will post any update to IndyMedia and

Thankfully the supreme court voted today to support civil rights in the Michigan affirmative action case.

Remeber, whatever and WHENEVER the court decides on the Texas sodomy law we will show up at Santorum's office.

add your comments

This is what polygamy looks like
by Mike Wednesday, Jun. 25, 2003 at 10:06 AM

The "other" media seems to be under the impression the Supremes will issue their ruling tomorrow, Thursday, June 26

add your comments

by John-RPGH Thursday, Jun. 26, 2003 at 2:16 AM

hopefully they issue it tomorrow...i be there for the next date i dont think.

well, ill be there with my fellow activists :-).hopefully tomorrow i can get the materials for a banner beforehand incase they dont overturn it. well see.

add your comments

© 2001-2009 Pittsburgh Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not endorsed by the Pittsburgh Independent Media Center.
Disclaimer | Privacy