<p>As much as people want to pretend that children seeing feet moving under a stall door and hearing ACLU lawyers having sex is the same as other bodily functions, it is not. A bathroom is designed for urinating, defecating, and vomiting, it is not a room for sexual activity. There are designated places for sexual activities, such as bedrooms. I don’t think that a bathroom has evolved enough into a place for sex for enough people to have accepted it as such. That would be the “sexroom” not the bathroom.</p>
<p>The ACLU declaring this before the SC primary, by the way, will raise Huckabee’s vote count. This is exactly the type of liberal idiocy that people vote against when they vote for social conservatives. Maybe this idea was sprung by the Huckabee campaign to get out the vote.</p>
<p>Does anyone know which presidential candidates the ACLU primarily donates to? Besides the goodwill they donate to Huckabee?</p>
<p>wow, that IS an interesting concept - just imagine: laws to protect children from being corrupted. Oh, wait! There already ARE laws like that aren’t there, even laws such as contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Guess that idea is not so new after all. ;)</p>
<p>And Hanna, I’d argue that for Craig to rely on the ACLU arguments on privacy as a defense for his case does in effect mean that he is admitting to guilt (again). Yet he is trying to withdraw his admission of guilt to a specific crime, not defend his reasons for acting the way he did; he is arguing that he did not do the act he was accused of, that his intent and actions were interpreted incorrectly. So the privacy argument will not help him with that argument; it is designed more to help the individual who admits he did the act/crime but is arguing that he should not be convicted for those actions based on a violation of a constitutional right to privacy (such as gay individuals in similar circumstances). The privacy argument is just a technicality for a guilty person to avoid conviction but will not help Craig’s reputation at all (not that anything will at this point).</p>
<p>scansmom: Never disagreed with that. I was merely pointing out that such an argument has limitations like any other, and that the assuming that appealing to protecting children is in and of itself a finishing argument is misguided.</p>
<p>For the record, I’m not really condoning one side or the other in this debate, just pointing out that the privacy argument is not quite as horribly flawed as so many people here are saying it is.</p>
<p>Wait a minute. Isn’t the ACLU riding to the rescue of Sen. Craig – a Republican social conservative? Social conservatives all across the country should be applauding the ACLU for attempting to save one of their own.</p>
<p>I think we are engaging in a bit of hyperbole. Sen. Craig was soliciting for sex; presumably, if the man in the next stall had agreed, they would have gone somewhere else to engage in sex. He was not proposing to have sex there and then. So I suppose he was charged with soliciting sex. Am I correct? I don’t remember all the details.</p>
<p>Personally, I’d like regulations against people canoodling in public.</p>
<p>From the U-W article: “The woman, from Madison, Wis., and the man, from Stitzer, Wis., both in their early 20s, were immediately ticketed for lewd and lascivious conduct, evicted from the stadium, and forced to appear in court for the first time on Monday, Larson said.”</p>
<p>This couple obviously needs the ACLU to intervene, so that they can continue to seek out bathrooms to have sex in. Maybe it’s a fetish. They like to hear the toilets flushing around them.</p>
<p>Coreur: Republicans wanted Craig to resign, as they consider him a huge embarrassment and would not be asking the ACLU or anyone else to defend him. He is also from a state that would likely replace him with another Republican, so they have no stake in his longevity as a senator.</p>
<p>No, Marite, you are not correct. Of course, it’s to your credit that ■■■■■■■■ for sex in public restrooms isn’t an area in which you have any expertise. Those of us who live in NJ are quite familiar with this phenomenon – remember our esteemed Governor Jim McGreevey?</p>
<p>A friend who worked as a security guard in a Macys department store during college used to rouse men out of the stalls as part of his duties. One would stand in a Macy’s shopping bag so only one pair of feet was showing. How clever.</p>
<p>Coureur, why in the world would social conservatives want Craig saved? He is a “stinky albatross” in the words of VD Hanson. And the only thing he was known for that would fall under the social conservative umbrella was his objection to gay marriage. (Oh, the irony…) He was championing amnesty for illegals, but othewise was a faceless dud in congress.</p>
<p>I saw a store clerk in a furniture store get tipped by 2 men when he gave them the keys to a private locked restroom. The problem is that it does tie the restroom up for a few minutes, but my guess is that the clerk made a nice sum on the side because of the area it was in.</p>
<p>Why does this thread keep referring to two ACLU lawyers having sex in a public rest room? They have long since moved here to MA, gotten married, and opened a bed-and-breakfast. A much more likely scenario is two Republican married “but I’m not really gay” Evangelicals.</p>
<p>My daughter’s all-women’s dorm has co-ed bathrooms in several parts of the building for the convenience of male visitors (and also to protect their plumbing – the individual dorm rooms each have their own sinks, and we all know what male visitors would do in those sinks if there was no bathroom nearby). Perhaps the co-ed facilities could be helpful to girls living in doubles who otherwise would have to sexile their roommates.</p>