IGF contributing author John Corvino is hitting the lecture circuit on the topic "What's Morally Wrong with Homosexuality?" Here's his upcoming schedule:
April 7 - Temple University, Philadelphia
April 8 - Penn State University
April 10 - Southwest Texas State University
April 11 - Southern Methodist University
April 17 - Muskegon Community College
For further information, contact him at j.corvino@wayne.edu.
By the way, aside from his heavy-hitting pieces on homosexuality
and morality (noted top right on the IGF homepage), you can
read Corvino's take on The Advocate's fall into irrelevancy, as
evinced by that gay and lesbian newsmagazine's recent cover story
innuendo about Supreme Court Justice David Souter. I especially
liked this aside:
Are you surprised, by the way, that a gay-friendly justice [Souter] is a Bush Sr. appointee? Stranger things have happened. Consider that the late Justice Harry Blackmun, author of the magnificent dissent in Bowers, was appointed by Nixon, and that Justice Stevens, arguably the most liberal current member of the court, was appointed by Ford. By contrast, the author of the extremely homophobic majority opinion in Bowers, the late Justice White, was a Kennedy appointee.
Which just shows how wrongheaded all the partisan pig-headedness over court appointments can turn out to be.
A Chance to Get It Right.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments this week on the
constitutional permissibility of state laws that criminalize the
way gay and lesbian couples make love, the indomitable Andrew
Sullivan weighs in with a piece in the New Republic (available
online at andrewsullivan.com).
Sullivan reminds us just how heinous a ruling the high court came
down with some 16 years ago when it last visited the issue, in the
Bowers v. Hardwick case. Here he reflects on the views of
then-Chief Justice Warren Burger and Justice Lewis
Powell:
Burger dismissed any notion of homosexual orientation as a part of human nature and derided any comparison to private heterosexual conduct as absurd. "Are those with an 'orientation' toward rape to be let off merely because they allege that the act of rape is 'irresistible' to them?" Burger wrote in a letter to Justice Lewis Powell during the Hardwick deliberations. ...
When Professor Laurence Tribe, representing the plaintiffs, talked of the sanctity of a person's home being invaded by cops policing homosexual activity, Powell was offended. "I must say that when Professor Tribe refers to the 'sanctity of the home,' I find his argument repellent," Powell spoke into his Dictaphone as the case was proceeding.
As you wait for the Supreme decision, which isn't expected before late spring or summer, you can peruse some of the amicus briefs this go-round in the box located on the IGF homepage.
Gender-blind Bind.
The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing a Wisconsin bill that would allow health clubs to offer single-sex exercise activities or memberships. According to a roundup in the Washington Post (click and scroll down), the ACLU contends the measure would be "a severe setback to the civil rights movement." Apparently, exercising on a same-sex basis in equivalent to posting a sign that says no Jews or blacks welcome.
Of course, unlike racial or religious discrimination, there is a
rational reason why some men and women might want to self-segregate
when doing knee bends and thigh extensions, regardless of any
argument on behalf of the right of association, which the ACLU
apparently no longer feels merits protection. And yes, I realize
these are commercial establishments. But unlike going out to eat at
a restaurant or to shop at a store, you join a gym pretty much as
you would a private club, and so the right of association ought to
be respected.
Recent Postings