Culture Wars, Oral Sex, and Constitutional Niceties

There is a little something brewing down here in Georgia. In the face of drastic budget cuts, several state representatives turned their anger on the University System of Georgia. Rep. Calvin Hill waved a media guide around and barked his disapproval about Georgia State University offering courses in “male prostitution” and “oral sex” and “queer theory.” (Hill had difficulty, apparently, distinguishing a course catalog from a media guide, but more on this later.) Lesser-known (and apparently media-hungry) Charlice Byrd emerged from the thicket to call for a purge from the university system of Georgia all those who teach such subjects. She urged supporters in a youtube address to write their legislators and their media outlets, and promises were made to engage the Christian Coalition to put pressure on the political process.

For those of us who hoped that the slothful ignorance of the right-wing culture wars was being nailed into its coffin with the 2008 election, this is the news that the corpse is still flailing about. We can be hearted that the University System’s representatives acquitted themselves nicely before both legislature and media. They pointed out, for instance, that the media guide is not a course guide—there are no classes on oral sex, just an expert listed in case someone in the media happens to be doing research on the subject of, say, contemporary casual social attitudes towards oral sex and seeks expert advice. And a committee hearing featured the expert on male prostitution—Kirk Elifson, an Army captain, Vietnam veteran whose research has been utilized by the Center for Disease Control.

For his part, Calvin Hill has been forced to retreat in the face of his own foolishness, even insisting recently that the media blew his comments out of proportion. There is no indication yet that Byrd has done so.

There is, I promise, a constitutional issue here. Byrd’s call for a faculty purge runs afoul of the Georgia Constitution, which grants governance of the university system to a board of regents. The point, of course, was to insulate higher education from the whims of legislative fancy (and insanity).

There is one more hearing scheduled for next week on this subject. With any luck, the calm handling of this situation by the university will have embarrassed Byrd enough that we never hear of this again. Or, at least, until another wingnut emerges from the woodwork.

Civil Liberties and Obama's Failure

Despite the initial good news of the Obama administration on the civil liberties front, things have soured considerably in the last week. Obama’s public closure of Guantanamo was a necessary first step in returning something like constitutional sanity to a government hijacked by the right wing in the past eight years. But closing Guantanamo, it should be acknowledge by all, is only a first step—not an end game, and certainly nothing like a complete victory. It was only a very public announcement of a plan. The devil, of course is in the details.

One of those details emerged this week. Why has Obama reneged on one of his most important campaign promises? He had repeatedly called the Bush Administration’s invocation of state secrets opportunistic and anathema to constitutional government. So many waited with anticipation when AG Eric Holder dispatched a DOJ lawyer, Eric Letter, to file his administration’s claims in the case of Mohamed v. Jeppesen DataPlan, currently before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The case involves torture in Bush’s extraordinary rendition plan. This would have been a perfect opportunity for Obama’s administration to repudiate his predecessors and its legal tactics.

So why did Letter argue before the three-judge panel that the entire matter is a state secret? The details of the extraordinary rendition plan—a truly horrific policy that has bloodied the America’s hands and sullied our reputation—are known throughout the world. Why not air them in a federal courtroom? Why not submit to the rule of law? Is this not the American Way? And why does the Obama Justice Department attempt to cover up for the Bush Administration?

Those of us committed to restoring constitutional government have a duty to let this administration know such tactics are unacceptable. And they do not go unnoticed.