Arguing For Our Freedoms From Different Angles: A Good Thing

A few years ago, I found myself in the unusual situation of watching two political organizations to which I belonged arguing opposite sides in front of the Supreme Court. And I couldn't have been more pleased about it.

The case was Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, in which the Supreme Court was considering the constitutionality of a school voucher program in Cleveland. Attorneys from the Institute for Justice were there to defend the voucher program, while Americans United for Separation of Church and State were there to oppose it.

Why was I pleased? Because both sides were there to argue for our freedoms: the Institute for Justice for the freedom of parents to have a choice about where their children go to school, and Americans United to argue against public funds going to religious schools.

In a country that is supposed to be the paragon of freedom, it shouldn't be as rare as it is to see two sides advocating for different aspects of our liberties. Good stuff would come of more of this type of debate.

Although I still hold Americans United in high regard, I let my membership lapse when I realized the organization is as much concerned with preserving the virtual monopoly of government-run schools as it is with preserving the separation of church and state.

School vouchers would be an imperfect system, but if done right they could lead to higher quality schools than we have today. It's especially critical that we provide more choices for poor kids who are trapped in their poorly-performing neighborhood public school. I've heard the argument that we need to help such poor kids by straightening out all the problems of the public education system, but its unfair to not give them the opportunity to get out of a lousy school immediately. Vouchers are at least worth experimenting with in limited pilot programs.

I am comfortable with the Institute for Justice's argument that, in a voucher system, it is the parents who may choose to send their children to a religious school, so the government has no direct ability to establish religion through a voucher program. I worry more about the opposite scenario where religious fanatics gain control of public school boards, thereby subjecting all the public school students in their district to religious indoctrination. Think Kansas.

Still, I understand and respect anybody who argues that school vouchers are wrong because they funnel public money into religious schools. Perhaps a suitable compromise would be to require any religious school accepting voucher funds to (a) keep secular academic instruction separate from religious instruction and (b) allow any student to skip the religious part of the day.

Free Starchild!

Starchild, a flamboyant Libertarian from San Francisco, was recently arrested for prostitution in a sting operation in Fremont, California. Well, "flamboyant" is an understatement when describing someone who shows up at LP of California conventions wearing butterfly wings and hot pants, looking a lot like Peter Frampton in drag. That description no doubt makes him sound like yet another Libertarian whacko, but the other side of the story is that, unlike those whackos, Starchild is a brilliantly intelligent person with a great deal of integrity.

And most importantly, Starchild is completely harmless. He is certainly not a criminal mastermind whose capture was worth setting up a sting operation involving seven Fremont police officers.

Here's a (long) email from Starchild telling about his arrest, and giving some good arguments against treating prostitutes as criminals:

First of all, please forgive if this personal message is unwanted,  
off-topic or you receive it multiple times. As most of you getting this  
have probably heard, I was arrested last month in an entrapment  
operation by the Fremont police for peacefully trying to make a living  
as an escort. They charged me with 647b "soliciting prostitution,"  
which many governments consider illegal thanks to their vested interest  
in having lots of laws to enforce and to puritan anti-sexual morality  
which is still unfortunately widespread.

 So, my arraignment hearing is scheduled for tomorrow:

WHERE: Fremont Municipal Court, 39439 Paseo Padre Parkway, Fremont
WHEN: Friday morning (Jan. 6) at 9:00 a.m.

 I realize 9:00 a.m. on a weekday is a bad time for most people. They  
obviously don't schedule these hearings for the convenience of people  
who don't work for the criminal justice system! But if you are able and  
willing to attend, I will certainly be grateful. If you are planning to  
come or need a ride, please call me for details - [snip...]

 If you can't attend (or maybe even if you can), would be willing to  
call and/or email Fremont's mayor and city council members? This is not  
just for me, though naturally I'd also like to see the Fremont police  
get some negative feedback from their bosses as a result of what they  
did to me, but so that other people won't be similarly victimized.

 Here are the city leaders' names, phone numbers, and email addresses:

Bob Wasserman
Mayor
(510) 284-4011
bwasserman@ci.fremont.ca.us

Steve Cho
Vice Mayor
(510) 494-4895 x5901
scho@ci.fremont.ca.us

Dominic Dutra
Councilmember 
(510) 492-4148
ddutra@ci.fremont.ca.us

Bob Wieckowski
Councilmember 
(510) 494-4895 x5904
bwieckowski@ci.fremont.ca.us

Anu Natarajan
Councilmember
(510) 494-4895 x5902
anatarajan@ci.fremont.ca.us

 And here are some possible talking points for communicating with the  
politicians:

-Prosecuting prostitution is a waste of police resources and taxpayer  
money
-The police claim they are underfunded and understaffed; if they have  
money and personnel to do this kind of thing, obviously that's a false  
claim
-How can the police claim not to have the resources to investigate auto  
theft or burglar alarms if they have the resources to entrap escorts  
(see memo below)?
-I don't want Fremont to get the reputation of being an intolerant  
place that doesn't respect different lifestyles
-Allowing police to keep proceeds from sting operations against  
prostitutes and drug dealers encourages abuse
-People want their police to focus on responding to real crimes
-Are you aware of abuses in the Fremont City Jail? (e.g. being  
threatened by a police officer with transfer to an institution where I  
could be raped, if I didn't cooperate with them; denied meals; kept  
shivering in cold rooms, all of which happened to me)
-See if you can find out any information about:
    (1) How much money the city spends on going after prostitution in  
particular and/or victimless crimes in general
    (2) Why the police are engaging in these operations
    (3) How many escorts have been arrested? How many clients?

 A couple interesting articles are attached below. The first in  
particular is good ammunition to use when writing or calling the  
politicians (big thanks to Morey Straus for posting the blog entry that  
turned it up). This is a memo from the Fremont Police Chief, describing  
how because of an alleged lack of resources they (a) no longer  
investigate auto thefts, (b) eliminated a street crime unit, (c) no  
longer dispatch police to respond to alarms going off unless there is a  
"verified problem," etc.!

 And yet they apparently have PLENTY of resources to:

(1) Find my ad on the Internet, and have an undercover officer think up  
a bunch of lies and call me in San Francisco posing as a client to get  
me to come to Fremont
(2) Have 7 officers and a police dog, along with two patrol cars,  
waiting around the hotel for me to show up (!!!)
(3) Book me, keep me in the Fremont jail overnight, and then drive me  
to Santa Rita the next day, only to be cited and released with a piece  
of paper telling me when to show up in court (which they could have  
simply given me at the time of my arrest and sent me on my way -- but  
no, evidently I was such a threat to public safety that they had to  
keep me in jail overnight even though the legal standard is supposed to  
be "innocent until proven guilty" and I had not been convicted of any  
crime... sorry if I rant a little bit here!)

 The second article below talks about how the police department stands  
to profit from prostitution and drug stings. This may partly explain  
why they like to devote resources to this even as they cut back on  
trying to catch real criminals. The first article in particular is good  
ammunition to use when writing or calling the politicians.

************************************************************************ 
***

 I'm also encouraging calls to the Best Western Garden Court Inn (5400  
Mowry Avenue, Fremont) where the arrest took place. They need to hear  
from the public that hosting police stings is bad for business - (510)  
792-4300  or Info@GardenCourtInn.com.

 Here are some possible talking points for the hotel:

-I want to speak with your manager
-I want a written response from the manager
-I won't stay at your hotel because of this incident
-I'm a customer and want to be able to have an escort come to my room  
without fear of either of us being arrested
-Allowing police stings against people who are guilty of nothing more  
than peaceful, consensual acts between adults is going to cost you more  
business from escorts and their clients and supporters than you get  
from the police
-Don't be intimidated by law enforcement; it's important we all stand  
up for our rights
-The Best Western Garden Court Inn is already mentioned on Craigslist  
and other venues warning people to stay away
-People are going to associate your establishment with bigoted and  
intolerant attitudes
-People are not going to feel safe staying at your establishment if  
they know the police might be hanging around

 Oh, and I'm also interested in publicizing this case, if any of you  
know anyone in the media who would like to do a story about my  
experience.

 Finally, if you aren't the activist type, there is one other way you  
can help, which is to contribute to my legal fund. Unfortunately I have  
not found a lawyer to take this on pro bono; it looks like it may cost  
me about $2500, or more if the case goes to trial. As of right now, I  
will have to pay this out of pocket. Please don't send money if you're  
just getting by yourself and don't have it to spare. But if you are  
financially secure, any donation you care to send to help me with the  
costs of fighting this would be most welcome. Checks may be sent to  
Starchild, 3531 16th Street, San Francisco, CA 94114.

 Whatever you can do, thanks from the bottom of my heart for your help  
and support. Even when you know you have nothing to be ashamed of,  
being arrested is a demoralizing and disheartening experience. It's  
good to know that I have friends, and that people who understand that  
this prosecution is an affront to justice are paying attention and care  
what happens to me. No one should have to go through this as a  
consequence of simply offering an honest service to consenting adults.  
With your help, perhaps my case will have some impact in making this  
less likely to happen to others.

Happy New Year and best wishes,
       <<< starchild >>>
        (aka Chris Fox)

[The Fremont Police Department memo Starchild mentions is here:

http://www.fremontpolice.org/alarm/chiefs_ltr.html

and a copy of the Oakland Tribune article Starchild referenced is here:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20051205/ai_n15902716]