By Sean Sullivan Lagniappe columnist

Well there is a new protest going on in Alabama today. This one is not focused on a war in the Middle East, but in the bedrooms of Alabama. To bring you up to date on a little blue law history back in 1998, may I point out just two years before the Y2K Bug was going to kill millions and wreck modern society, the Alabama legislature obviously had enough free time, away from crafting of laws that would benefit the state’s citizens (although it feels weird for me to type laws and benefits in the same sentence), to draft and pass a law prohibiting the sale of uhhm…uhmm “marital aides” to the fine residents of the Yellowhammer State.

So you can police yourself and make sure you are up to current code, you can possess these devices in the state but you cannot buy them in Alabama. I guess if you are stopped and searched, the law enforcement officer will have to decide, based on number of devices you are carrying, as to whether they are for personal use or distribution. Maybe if the “marital aides” are in different containers officers might say they were packaged for sale and maybe even come up with a dollar figure for the television newscasters to call out for a “street value” for said apparati. Just imagine bringing the television cameras into the evidence room for a shot of tables piled full of those things.

Just last week this law was being challenged by one Alabamian, Loretta Nall of Alex City, she is currently pushing a campaign for women and I guess some men to mail these devices to Alabama Attorney General Troy King. I’ll have to disagree with her and agree with King’s spokesman who says the devices should be mailed to the members of the state legislature instead of the Attorney General. The 140 politicians on Goat Hill were the ones that made the law so maybe with a little protest they can find time in their busy schedules to rescind it. The law was challenged in 2004 and it stood up in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The judge claimed that the constitution provided no right to sexual privacy. Legal experts also claim that the law could be repealed if Alabamians decided, “a prohibition on sex toys is misguided, or ineffective, or just plain silly.” I think the “silly” part of that opinion rings quite true.

Another question this raises is if you can legally possess these “prostheses” but can’t buy them in Alabama then how do they get here? Is there a bootlegging law against interstate transportation of such “implements?” These questions lead my mind to wander into a possible film adaptation of the current Alabama law. Possibly a savvy young filmwright could use the “Smokey and the Bandit” template with sex toys instead of Coors beer as the bootlegged cargo. Just think of the theme song; “well they’re horny back in ‘Bama and there’s sex toys in Texarkana and they’ll get ‘em there no matter what it takes…southbound and down, loaded up and truckin’.” I could go on, trust me.

I’ve also been wondering what are the states plans for managing this silly law? I wonder if in an attempt to make a tax dollar grab Alabama law makers might make the sale of sex toys legal again, but only through state stores. The sale of alcohol is legal in Alabama but is tightly controlled by the state and maybe that is their plan for these devices, because we all know that sex toys are just as dangerous as alcohol to Alabamians. Of course a regulatory agency would have to be formed to enforce the legal sale of sex toys and I’m pretty sure it would be named the A.D.C. I would back this kind of enforcement agency as long as they have identify themselves as Alabama Dildo Control whenever they made a raid or a bust, plus they would have to wear shirts and windbreakers with Alabama Dildo Control printed on the back.

As silly as these ideas are and as silly as the law is, I think the bigger issue here is the squeaky wheel’s influence in state and federal law making. I don’t have any personal stake in this sex toy debate other than the civil liberties issue. I’m as guilty as anyone for having blinders on, only seeing what affects my family and me on a daily basis and not the bigger freedoms picture. While the letter of the law doesn’t specifically grant the right for free trade of sex toys, the spirit of the Constitution does. As silly as this debate is I think it shows us that groups of people with an agenda to limit personal freedom can erode those freedoms while the rest of us are busy living our lives. Often the people who push for new laws or changes to old ones feel they are doing for the right reasons, but we must be mindful that my vision of the world or yours doesn’t get in the way of another’s right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, however or with whatever device they might pursue it.

Sean Sullivan is Lagniappe lagniappe columnist. Contact him at ssullivan@lagniappemobile.com.

Archives