Friday, March 17, 2006

Gays versus Irish

Am I missing something?

This week, a Weekly Dig piece on Wacko Hurley--the head of the South Boston veterans' organization that runs Boston's St. Patrick's Day parade--included a mysterious quote. Referring, apparently, to the 1995 US Supreme Court decision that said the South Boston Allied War Veterans' Council could exclude organized groups of gay and lesbian marchers, Hurley said this: "One of the judges made the comparison: If the NAACP had a parade, do you think they'd want the KKK in?"

Ponder that for a moment.

Now turn your attention to today's New York Times story on controversy around that city's SPD festivities. Christine Quinn--a lesbian who's speaker of the NY City Council--wanted to march in New York's SPD Parade with gay supporters, and while wearing a gay-pride pin. No dice. As parade chairman John Dunleavy explained to the Irish Times, "If an Israeli group wants to march in New York, do you allow neo-Nazis into their parade? If African-Americans are marching in Harlem, do they have to let the Ku Klux Klan into their parade?"

???

I've looked at some clips on the 1995 Supreme Court decision, and I can't find any comment like the one Hurley remembers. Maybe one of the justices said that; maybe none did. Whatever. What's truly perplexing is the conviction, among a certain segment of Irish Americans, that gay people are out to fuck them up.

If anyone can explain, that would be super.

3/17/2006 1:42:41 PM by Adam Reilly | Comments [4] |

Friday, March 17, 2006 3:00:55 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

The closest I saw was in Souter's opinion for the unanimous court,in that he comments on Chester Darling's argument that because the parade organizers had excluded the Klan and an anti-school-busing group, they were equal opportunity neutral.

The ruling is available, but is pretty vague about judges' views.

From a Globe piece on April 26, 1995:

"My clients are ecumenical -- to a point," Darling answered. He noted that over the years the veterans had kept a few other groups out of the parade, such as the Ku Klux Klan, an antibusing group and antigay demonstrators.

Breyer, formerly on the US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, suggested that the "actual reason" for the exclusion of the gay group was "that it makes your clients feel uncomfortable."

But other justices seemed to be concerned about the rights of the veterans.

massmarrier

Friday, March 17, 2006 7:35:08 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

Did you catch this afternoon's report of the chairman of the NYC version today? John Dunleavy told the Irish Times,
"Today is St. Patrick's Day. We celebrate our faith and heritage, everything else is secondary,...If an Israeli group wants to march in New York, do you allow Neo-Nazis into their parade? If African Americans are marching in Harlem, do they have to let the Ku Klux Klan into their parade?...People have rights. If we let the ILGO in, is it the Irish Prostitute Association next?"

Maybe he and his like-minded chums can go into a big room on March 17th. Then they can parade round and round, and leave the rest of us alone.

massmarrier

Friday, March 17, 2006 10:22:47 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

I think you're right with your point that "among a certain segment of Irish Americans, that gay people are out to fuck them up."

One of the many ironies about the South Boston St. Patrick's Day case is that the gay people who wanted to march were actually Irish. As in, from Ireland. Unlike the "Irish"-Americans keeping them out.

anonymous

Saturday, March 18, 2006 11:02:07 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

Futile as it may be to defend a guy named Whacko, let me try.

The Supreme Court ruled in "Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian And Bisexual Group Of Boston" (515 U.S. 557, 6/19/1995), that a parade is a form of speech and so long as the parade organizers comply with local laws, they are free to communicate their message unimpeded by others.

As to Mr. Hurley's quote about the KKK marching in the NAACP's parade, well first ammendment arguments are often discussed in the extremes. If you say you're for the freedom of speech, nobody's going to ask you to defend the rights of the local newspaper to print op-eds. They'll ask about Nazis marching in Skokie, OH (NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY v. SKOKIE, 432 U.S. 43 (1977).

So Mr. Hurley was merely offering an extreme example of message encroachment or message obstruction - the offense he (and the Supreme Court) believes gay organizers commit by forcing themselves upon the St. Patrick's day parade.

Patrick

Comments are closed.