Americablog: Student Who Asked Scalia Sodomy Question Responds

[Hissyspit]

Two threads on the issue from Americablog. Part of the letter below. Full text of his letter is at the Wonkette (surprise there!) link below. (Mods, I posted this two different places, LBN and GD, sort of accidentally. Please combine as you see fit:

Beginning of Eric Berndt's Letter:
Fellow Classmates,
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 (at oral argument for Lawrence)?

Although I 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...

MORE AT WONKETTE

Scalia and Sodomy, Part II
by John in DC - 4/16/2005 08:36:00 PM
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/04/scalia-and-sodomy-part-ii.html

Let me back up what Joe just wrote below. I just read the open letter from the NYU student who asked Scalia this week if he sodomized his wife. And all I can say is, THANK YOU.

Joe links to the entire letter in the post below, but here is an especially good segment. This guy rocks, in my book. And anyone who says "well that wasn't appropriate" should think about how appropriate it is for Scalia to lament that states can no longer regulate masturbation (not kidding). If Antonin Scalia can regulate masturbation, then we have the right to know if he sodomizes his wife. either these are private sex acts or they're fair game for state involvement. Scalia can't have it both ways. God bless this guy for doing what he did.
I am 17 months out of a lifelong closet and have lost too much time to heterosexist hegemony to tolerate those who say, as Dr. King put it, "just wait." 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.

Many of our classmates chose NYU over higher-ranked schools because of our reputation as a "private university in the public service" and our commitment to certain values. We were the first law school to require that employers pledge not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. Of Scalia's law schools that have "signed on to the homosexual agenda," our signature stands out like John Hancock's. We won a federal injunction in the FAIR litigation as an "expressive association" that counts acceptance of sexual orientation as a core value. Those who worry about our school's prestige should remember how we got here and consider whether flattering those who mock what we believe and are otherwise willing to fight for appears prestigious or pathetic. 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.

Scalia's Sodomy Questioner Responds
by Joe in DC - 4/16/2005 08:22:00 PM
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/04/scalias-sodomy-questioner-responds.html

Last Wednesday, John posted a link to the story about, Eric Berndt, a student at NYU Law School asking Antonin Scalia if he ever sodomized his wife. Thanks to Impeach Bush for pointing us to the student's response to his critics which was posted by Wonkette.

Any doubts about whether Scalia should be asked this question will be assuaged by reading his hateful, homophobic dissent in Lawrence v. Texas. And realize that under the theocracy, everyone will be asked these questions, because sodomy is going to be illegal for everyone, not just the homos.

Wonkette Comments:
Scalia Subjected to Probing Question, the Aftermath
We've been following the, uhm, fallout of the New York University law student who asked Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia "Do you sodomize your wife?" (Shouldn't it have been, "When did you stop sodomizing your wife?") To our surprise, the, ahem, bone of contention seems to be whether the law student has "right" to ask that question. Because it's really humiliating to have your private life scrutinized in public or something. Yeah! Can you imagine making laws about it? Whew. Now that would be humiliating.

[Erika]

1. The courts felt that sex acts between consenting adults

were their own business. Homos?

[The Doctor.]

2. The kid is very bright...

To boldly ask a question no one wants to answer is to shine a bright light on the very hypocrisy that is anti-privacy laws.

Of course Scalia would not 'dignify the question with an answer' because poking one's nose into private and consensual matters is undignified.

Eric Berndt made an excellent point. And that point is most likely to be lost on the bigots.

I remember watching Bill Maher some years ago, the issue of (I believe) a congressman masturbating in a men's room stall at a restaurant, and subsequent resignation due to someone discovering him in the act, came up.

Bill could care less of course and stood on the platform, 'It's a bathroom - you're there to get rid of bodily fluids.'

One of the guests was a female supermodel whose name escapes me.

She believed that what he did was wrong and immoral.

Never before that moment had I wished more that I were on that panel to say, "Hey, so what you're saying is I should follow you into the ladies' room during the break to make sure you're not doing anything 'Immoral'... right?"

"What? you want privacy? - Then how ever will we know if you're doing something bad?"

I'm sure Bill would have loved it... and raced me too.

[Erika]

4. Great post

We stay out of others business and their privacy is respected. When the courts attempt to interject themselves into privacy on a moral basis, we have every right to question their personal morals.

[spooky3]

13. The difference is that a public restroom is not the same as the privacy

of one's home or other private place. Just because urination and defecation are appropriate in a public restroom does not make it an appropriate place for all other acts.

[not systems]

3. This guy deserves a medal.

That pious pig Scalia is a cancer on the judiciary branch.

[Scooter24]

5. Bravo...

Mr. Berndt, job well done! :)

[Tux]

6. Scalia's wife

Wasn't the only one who took it wrong.

[Hissyspit]

7. Wonkette's comment:

The question should have been "When did you stop sodomizing your wife?" - when I first heard the story, I thought that that's what the student asked. I would have loved to have heard Scalia say "I didn't! Er, I mean, I did. I mean... Hey, stop that!"

[Swamp Rat]

8. kick

[laylah]

9. Excellent! n/t

[Q3JR4]

10. Hell yeah!

:spray::spray::rofl::spray::spray:
:loveya::toast::bounce::toast::loveya:
:yourock: Eric Berndt :yourock:
:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
:applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause:

[xchrom]

11. he's amazing -- and his follow up response

is every bit as good as the original question.

the question and his response very cogently contains the bitterness, anger, and even the irony of being gay right at this time.

the right is determined to use glbtq people -- and mr berndt's question and response presents a fantastic basis for resistance now made very public.

as a tax paying citizen -- if the ''right'' wants to ask me about my bed room behavior -- i have the ''right'' to ask about theirs.

[Hissyspit]

12. He was using irony in his questioning...

He is treating the justice as one who the justice is passing judgment on would be treated, and I believe a significant population can not cognitively comprehend irony. I don't mean they are not culturally conditioned to be aware of it (like a lot of people); I mean they do not have the capacity to perceive it - the same way some people are color blind, in a sense.

Just a theory, though. I could be wrong.

Scalia is a smart man. He either gets it and doesn't care, or doesn't get it. Either way, he will hide behind the 'inappropriateness' defense, just because he can (at least with many people.) So to many people, it seemed simply a 'nasty' question of an authority figure worthy of blind respect, instead of a legitimage political inquiry of someone who is in the service of citizens and was appearing in a public forum. Only authoritarians think that simplistically, though.

[spooky3]

14. I think Scalia's like the many other RWers who are determined to

control behavior in others regardless of others' rights or alternative points of view. They think their beliefs are more important than others', and can't conceive of being wrong. When reality gets in the way of RWers' beliefs, the beliefs always win.

[TroglodyteScholar]

15. Scalia loves the pooper - Rethugs operate on shame over their own behavior

If a Rethug has a drug problem, he rails against urban mothers on crack. If he like whores, he'll speculate about a Dem's sex life to no end. You can bet he likes to put that sanctimonious rod wherever it'll fit, so it makes him feel better about himself to condemn someone else for similar behavior.

[rodeodance]

16. reminds me condi's comment to Boxer--'don't impue my integrity'

[A Simple Game]

17. Just who does this kid think he is questioning?

What nerve, does he think Scalia is a Democratic President or something?

[Toucano]

18. Rock on! n/t

[Moderator]

19. locking

Discussion here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3492596