KIRBY DICK’S documentary “Outrage“, which opened nationally last week, has turned gay activists’ controversial tactic of exposing closeted public figures—in this case, closeted Republicans perceived as advancing anti-gay policies in their public lives—into a feature-length film. The movie targets an array of elected officials and prominent GOP operators, but of particular interest is its focus on Charlie Crist (pictured with wife), the governor of Florida, who has thrown his hat into the 2010 race for the US Senate, with the support of much of the party establishment.

As if to confirm the film’s thesis that the press go out of their way to help preserve this sort of charade, National Public Radio opted to edit their reviewer’s piece on the movie to remove the names of politicos identified as closeted. At this point, as several others note, this seems rather quaint—and indeed, like an endorsement of the notion that there’s something especially awful about being accused of being gay. Nor do the network’s protestations that they simply avoid traffic in gossip and rumour hold up: They are only too happy to pass along unconfirmed reports about the sex lives of entertainers.

Which is odd, when you think about it, since while the public is clearly interested in the romances of musicians and movie stars, it’s hard to claim there’s a genuine public interest served by poking into their private lives. When it comes to public servants, however, we generally accept that it’s perfectly legitimate to scrutinise their private conduct to the extent it’s relevant to assessing the sincerity of their professed beliefs or the veracity of their public personas. Usually the controversy over “outing” has to do not with elected officials, but with high-level staffers, who have not volunteered themselves for scrutiny in the same way as political candidates. In practice legislative directors and analysts too yield significant public power—legislators are important people, and can’t be bothered with writing and reading bills themselves—but “Outrage” limits itself to indisputable public figures. If the claims about them are so poorly sourced as to constitute plain slander, the film shouldn’t be rewarded with any kind of attention; if they’re at least credible, one may as well save the listeners a Google search and say what they are.

See Economist: Is Outing Of Closeted Political Figures A Useful Tactic?

Published by 

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/economist-is-…

Tags: Ace, Act, Acti, Activist, Activists, Ads, Ali, Ally, Amp, Anc, Ba, Belief, Blogger, Border, Cal, Charlie Crist, Controversy, Coord, Demo, Dn, Doc, Documentary, Economist, elect, Entertainers, Era, Eric, Erica, Eve, Expos, Feature Length Film, Fir, Flo, Fo, Focus, Fox, Fr, gay, Gay Activist, Gay Activists, Gay Policies, google, Gop, gossip, Gove, Governor Of Florida, Hes, hiv, Homo, Homophobic, Hypocrisy, Hypocrite, Images, Irs, Kirby, Kirby Dick, Ld, Lea, Lead, Leads, Lear, Legislative Directors, Legislator, Legislators, Length Film, Listeners, Lt, Map, Met, Mis, Movie Stars, Mp, Msnbc, Mu, Mus, music, Names, National Public Radio, Nbc, Nbsp, Npr, Offi, Original Source, Outrage, Pac, Party Establishment, People, Pl, Political Candidates, Pols, Pos, Private Conduct, Private Lives, Prom, Protest, Public Persona, Public Radio, Public Servants, Rally, Rea, Republican, Republicans, Rig, Romance, Romances, Rov, Rr, Senate, sex, Sex Live, Shap, Sic, Sig, Sin, Sincerity, Spe, Speculation, Stab, Staffer, Staffers, Tact, Target, Targets, Ted, Tent, Towleroad, Uai, Us Senate, Veracity, Vet, Wh, Wit

Supreme Court takes up dispute over endorsement of gay adoption by Florida Bar’s family-law section

State Supreme Court justices critically questioned both sides today in a dispute over whether the family-law section of the Florida Bar should be allowed to legally endorse adoption for gay couples. A circuit judge in Miami threw out the statute banning adoption by gays but the case is headed for the Supreme Court. The Bar itself has not taken a position but its family-law section sought to file a “friend of the court” brief supporting the circuit court ruling. Lawyers supporting the statute objected — saying the Bar shouldn’t be using compulsory dues paid by all lawyers to fight on one side of a controversial issue.

Tallahassee attorney Barry Richard said the family section is a voluntary association and that its lawyer members have a right to take positions. But Matt Staver, representing the conservative Liberty Counsel, said Bar rules forbid lobbying on either side of a hot topic.

The attorneys argued over the distinction between lobbying the Legislature and filing a legal brief in court. They also disagreed about whether a voluntary section of the bar is restrained by the same rules applying to the full bar.

Chief Justices Peggy Quince and Justices Barbara Pariente, Fred Lewis, Charles Canady and Ricky Polston pressed Richard and Staver on the legal distinctions.

Pariente said that if the prohibition on pursuing controversial, divisive issues had been interpreted as a ban 50 years ago, the Bar could not have taken sides on racial integration. Lewis said he doesn’t think much of “friend of the court” briefs, because they are usually partisan advocacy rather than independent guidance on the law, and that the public doesn’t make a distinction between a section of the Bar and the whole Bar itself.

The court gave no indication when it might rule on whether the family law section can file its brief in the gay adoption case. See Supreme Court takes up dispute over endorsement of gay adoption by … Tallahassee.com