Pardon the lack of discourse and commentary today. Weblog will be back to its regular format on Monday. In the meantime, here's an overwhelming number of links to keep you busy …

Boston tells police to ignore gay sex at public rest areas:

  • Cops ordered to look away from public sex, what next? | Why does every gay spokesman have to be a champion for irresponsibility? Are there any who'll say the police were right in keeping rest areas free of predators, free of exhibitionists, free of anxieties for law-abiding citizens who simply wanted to be left alone? (Joe Fitzgerald, Boston Herald)
  • Public sex ruling stirs hot debate along highway | Our Supreme Judicial Court now says public sex is not illegal unless there's a good chance passers-by will see it. It's an enlightened view, it seems to me. Don't fret over what you can't see, or hear. (Margery Eagan, Boston Herald)
  • New rules alter line drawn on public sex | Massachusetts State Police will not automatically roust people meeting at roadside rest areas - even people believed to be engaging in sexual activity, according to new guidelines (The Boston Globe)
  • Cellucci: State won't allow sex in public areas | Despite police order, public sex will be prosecuted, says Massachusetts governor (The Boston Globe)
  • Cellucci vows enforcement of ban on sex at rest areas | "Public rest areas are not a place for sex, whether it's heterosexual (or) homosexual," says Massachusetts governor (Boston Herald)

Sexual ethics:

Subscriber access only You have reached the end of this Article Preview

To continue reading, subscribe now. Subscribers have full digital access.