Of High Crimes and Misdemenors (or not)

Is it perspective? Changing moral codes? (In)tolerance? I just don't get it. It seems like we have no perspective anymore about what is damaging to others, and what is merely unpleasant or innocently offensive.

In Scranton, PA, a lady yells some obscenities at an overflowing toilet... much like you or I might curse stubbing our toe or smacking our finger with a hammer. Ok, maybe a bit more sustained than one outburst, but still... in her own home, and at an unexpected and unwanted occurrence.

In Minneapolis, while on a "sting" operation, a Senator is observed by police doing some suggestive actions in a public toilet stall. Each action is somewhat innocent by itself, but taken together, we are told, they are indicators of signaling for homosexual conduct. Ok, personally not what I'd like to have happen to me in a men's room stall, but if it did, I believe I'd finish my business and move out smartly. No harm, no foul. The acts that are deemed "suggestive" need not be acted upon nor reciprocated, and there appears no consequence to ignoring them. Unpleasant but hardly injurious.

Then there is a sitting Senator who drives off a bridge into river, likely while drunk. He escapes from the car and walks home, rests until morning, then reports his actions and turns himself in (escorted by his high-priced family lawyer). His passenger is not as lucky, and ends up drowning despite the likelihood that had the driver helped or sought help, she likely would have survived.

What happens to these three?

The lady is charged with Disorderly Conduct, despite the fact it happened in her own home.

The bathroom Senator pleaded guilty to Disorderly Conduct, and now his Senatorial career is in jeopardy (he is seeking to withdraw his plea, and may yet succeed). His fellow party Senators are pressuring him to resign, and there is likely to be an Ethics Committee investigation of him.

The driving-into-a-river Senator pleads guilty to "leaving the scene of an accident", and not only remains in the Senate, but has remained in the Senate for nearly 30 years since the incident. No Ethics investigation was ever initiated. And, routinely, he can be counted on to lecture the other party and/or administration about "responsibility" and "ethics".

The ACLU, of course, is not silent. They say that one can't be prosecuted for swearing at a toilet or a Cop. They are amazingly silent, however, on anonymous gestures in a public toilet stall, or the appropriate behavior after driving into a body of water and leaving your companion to drown.

We all need to step back and realize that "freedom" doesn't mean freedom from being offended or upset. It means being free from real physical threats or harm. And when it comes to punishing those who offend us, we really need to differentiate between mere offense and true harm. And act accordingly.

CP