FW: Ashcroft and Gay Rights

[Bryan Wildenthal]

First of all, Hormel did not "get through" in the end.  He was denied
confirmation (indeed, was never even allowed a floor vote), though Clinton
did give him a temporary recess appointment.

The issue of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence was a pretext, as was the
equally ludicrous attempt to hold him responsible for the holdings of the
San Francisco Public Library (where he had supported development of a
collection of gay literature).  Hormel never "endorsed" the Sisters or had
anything to do with them.  The most his opponents had was videotape of him
on the reviewing stand of a gay pride parade apparently laughing as they and
numerous other contingents went by.  I don't think Senators Orrin Hatch and
Gordon Smith, among others, would have supported him if there were anything
to these pretextual arguments.

I hold no brief for the Sisters myself, though I do know that they do not
promote "hate."  They intend their mockery to be a lighthearted way of
protesting what they view as unjust and hypocritical policies of the
Catholic Church, though I don't doubt they cause offense to many, and I
don't endorse their methods myself.  I am genuinely surprised that Professor
Wagner or any Catholic would find such spoofing more offensive than calling
the Pope the Anti-Christ (as Bob Jones does).

Bryan Wildenthal, Thomas Jefferson School of Law

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David M Wagner [mailto:daviwag at REGENT.EDU]
> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 3:25 PM
> To: CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu
> Subject: Re: Ashcroft and Gay Rights
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Discussion list for con law professors
> > [mailto:CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu]On Behalf Of Bryan Wildenthal
> > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 1:19 AM
> > To: CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu
> > Subject: Re: Ashcroft and Gay Rights
> >
> >
>  Ashcroft was among the cabal of rightwing senators
> > who successfully prevented confirmation of President Clinton's
> > nominee (and
> > later recess appointee), Ambassador to Luxembourg James
> Hormel, solely
> > because he is openly gay.
>
>
> If memory does not play me false, I think the issue with Hormel had
> something to do with his endorsement of, and refusal to repudiate, the
> "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence," a group of homosexual
> street theatre
> artists whose metier is open and sustained mockery of
> Catholicism.  (For the
> record, this is offensive to Catholics.)  To get the flavor
> of the thing,
> imagine that Ashcroft was a patron of a latter-day minstrel
> show and/or had
> attended opening night of a revival JUD SUSS down at Klan
> headquarters, and
> had declined to see either as something that might expose him
> to legitimate
> reproaches.
>
> Since the Bob Jones card will obviously be played at this
> point, I must add
> (as a Catholic) that a purely theological challenge, even one
> that lacks the
> niceties that are customary in ecumenical dialogue, is in no
> way comparable
> to openly hate-filled mockery.
>
> Was the Sisters issue merely a pretext?  Well, who can so no
> for sure?  But
> I think that without it, Hormel would have found fewer and
> less determined
> opponents.  And even with it, he got through.
>
>
> David Wagner
>