Yippee for the rest of the country -- one less activist, heartless, arrogant judge with a penchant for saying and writing vile things.
My favorite story about Scalia is this:
WHEN U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia spoke Tuesday night at NYU's Vanderbilt Hall, "The room was packed with some 300 students and there were many protesters outside because of Scalia's vitriolic dissent last year in the case that overturned the Texas law against gay sex," our source reports. "One gay student asked whether government had any business enacting and enforcing laws against consensual sodomy. Following Scalia's answer, the student asked a follow-up: 'Do you sodomize your wife?' The audience was shocked, especially since Mrs. Scalia [Maureen] was in attendance. The justice replied that the question was unworthy of an answer."Of course, the question was worthy of an answer...and at least temporarily, Scalia was shamed....
We need more impertinent questions in America, not fewer.
Added 2/15 6:12 pm: More of Scalia's wit:
Many Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their children's schools, or as boarders in their home. They view this as protecting themselves and their families from a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive.By that logic, America would have never freed its slaves.
Right vs. wrong is different from Constitutional vs. unconstitutional. A law can be bad without being unconstitutional. The Supreme Court isn't supposed to be a super-legislature with the power to modify any law they don't like. Their job is to interpret the Constitution as written. That's why justices are selected for their legal expertise.
ReplyDeleteI surely agree that the government shouldn't make laws against consensual sodomy. However, that's not the question Scalia was asked to decide. Scalia was asked whether some particular provision of the US Constitution prevents the government from making laws against consensual sodomy.
David, I know what the purpose of the Constitution is, and I know Scalia's hostility and hatred of gay people, who want to do nothing but love those to whom they were born to be attracted:
ReplyDelete"The Court’s opinion contains...hints that Coloradans have been guilty of ‘animus’ or ‘animosity’ toward homosexuality, as though that has been established as Unamerican.... I had thought that one could consider certain conduct reprehensible–murder, for example, or polygamy, or cruelty to animals–and could exhibit even ‘animus’ toward such conduct."
-- Scalia, 1993
His name will be forever associated with prejudice like this. He was a stain on the United States of America and what it stands for.
David -- Did your quote come from this site:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/12-memorable-quotes-from-antonin-scalia/ ? Anyhow, that's a list of 12 supposedly shocking Scalia quotes, including yours. The shock comes from misreading and misinterpreting them.
Consider the one you chose. Apparently another judge had reasoned that the Colorado statute was unconstitutional because it was based on animus (and I suppose there were other reasons as well.) Scalia argued that animosity doesn't make a law unconstitutional. He gave vivid examples to illustrate his point -- illegal acts toward which there's widespread animosity. It's a misreading to think that he was saying that homosexualty is as bad as murder.
Scalia purposedly grouped homosexual acts with murderous acts, polygamy and cruelty to animals. He choose those on purpose. He could have made the same point by choosing instead spitting in public, which his still illegal in many places. He didn't -- he choose to equate gay acts with murder. He did that because he had a clear hatred of gays, and we know that not just based on this quote, either.
ReplyDeleteToday I wished I believed in heaven and hell, so I would know Scalia was being rejected at the pearaly gates for his obscenities and evils.
Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were best friends. If he had been the monster you think he was, I don't think Ginsburg would have maintained that sort of close, long-term friendship. See http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/14/politics/antonin-scalia-ruth-bader-ginsburg-friends/index.html
ReplyDeleteHowever, maybe you're right, David. Maybe he did have a clear hatred of gays. What's the evidence for this?
Scalia was also a good friend of Elana Kagan. He actually promoted her for the Supreme Court. See: http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/14/opinions/david-axelrod-surprise-request-from-justice-scalia/index.html
ReplyDeleteDiC: Who cares? Scalia was a bigot full of hate, and not just for gays, while being all for corporate and establishment power.
ReplyDelete--
It's time for you to find some other blog to troll.