Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:12 PM Dec 2012

Confronted by NJ Princeton student, Scalia defends arguments that strike some as anti-gay

Source: Associated Press

PRINCETON, N.J. (AP) — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on Monday found himself defending his legal writings that some find offensive and anti-gay.

Speaking at Princeton University, Scalia was asked by a gay student why he equates laws banning sodomy with those barring bestiality and murder.


Read more: http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-us-scalia-princeton-20121210,0,7317180.story

84 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Confronted by NJ Princeton student, Scalia defends arguments that strike some as anti-gay (Original Post) fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 OP
K&R !!! n/t RKP5637 Dec 2012 #1
Preview of his Prop 8 vote? marmar Dec 2012 #2
As if we needed one... HankyDub Dec 2012 #7
His Prop 8 vote is a given CanonRay Dec 2012 #26
Well it seems that a majority of citizens no longer think sodomy is immoral. Scalia, you Dustlawyer Dec 2012 #3
He Used The Same BS Argument in Lawrence v. Texas fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #5
That Lawrence dissent is a fitting Scalia memorial. I hope to intone it msanthrope Dec 2012 #9
"Quack! Quack!" struggle4progress Dec 2012 #4
Gosh, I hope that arthritis isn't horribly, achingly, endlessly painful. aquart Dec 2012 #8
I don't believe that it is caused by arthritis; he has been playing with himself under the gown. olegramps Dec 2012 #25
Agree. mountain grammy Dec 2012 #17
I think he is saying, "Read between the lines" to America. n/t left on green only Dec 2012 #18
If I remember correctly, the Democrats did object to his appointment more than token. nm rhett o rick Dec 2012 #20
No, Scalia was confirmed with a 98-0 vote. former9thward Dec 2012 #29
So glad the Democrats were looking out for us. nm rhett o rick Dec 2012 #30
"It's dead, dead, dead, dead." ellisonz Dec 2012 #6
Ironically fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #12
Scalia is an alleged Opus Dei memberi. They don't care what most Catholics think. Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #27
More fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #13
Scalia is a dumbass. ellisonz Dec 2012 #15
He does have a point. Legislatures make laws on all sorts of things. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #10
Difference is NONE of your Examples Are People fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #11
... SoapBox Dec 2012 #16
Actually health care is for people. But that's beside the point. The point is... Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #23
I Think Scalia's Personal Preferences Are Constantly In Play. Paladin Dec 2012 #24
If that's what he's doing he's in the wrong. His job is to interpret the Const, not make stuff up. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #41
Huh? fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #34
As I said, it is not about personal preferences. Glad you agree. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #40
And Guess What Courts Do? fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #43
Courts are unreliable. You can't count on them to rule with the law. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #44
Right fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #45
DC has no votes because it is in the Constitution. You should move to a place that has reps. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #47
So Predictable fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #48
If you want to have reps in Congress, move. Or we could give most of DC land back to VA and MD. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #55
Off Topic fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #59
You probably shouldn't have bought in DC. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #60
Repugnant fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #62
So you're descended from pre-Washington land-owning Southerners, is that your claim? Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #63
What's Your Problem? fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #65
My problem is uptight Washingtonians who view the world through a narrow lens. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #66
Right fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #70
So you think that states should VOTE on issues and not have judges make up the law, right? Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #72
No fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #77
And you don't live in the lens, you SEE through the narrow lens. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #74
You do have the right to vote. But as a US citizen who is not a citizen of a state, no reps for you. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #56
Maybe Someone Should Explain to You fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #61
We do live in a republic and one of the things that keeps it that way Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #64
Nonsense fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #67
OK. Dealing with it, dealing with it, ... dealing. Dealt with. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #68
And it's funny that you actually want people to vote on it instead of judges deciding now. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #69
Both fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #71
But my point is that it wouild be BETTER if we made good laws and didn't leave it up to Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #73
Let me know when I can elect a representative who can vote on that fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #76
As soon as you live in a STATE. And not in a district. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #78
So the State is More Important than the People fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #79
No other jurisdiction has more democrats than DC? Texas has more Democrats than DC. Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #81
"The State" as you call it is not more important than people. But states are more ... Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #82
You Do Know We Have Had a Constitutional Convention? fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #80
That's super! Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #83
Right fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #84
Nah fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #75
This is America, and civil liberties are the people's birthright. Politicub Dec 2012 #51
I agree. The government REQUIRING motor cycle helmets infringes on the rights... Pterodactyl Dec 2012 #54
Thanks It-Gets-Better Dec 2012 #14
He explained: elleng Dec 2012 #19
immoral fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #35
Oh fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #36
Myself and many others have theory about those who spend so much time and energy Socal31 Dec 2012 #21
Being gay is not a 'lifestyle choice' and most virulent anti gay activists are straight Bluenorthwest Dec 2012 #28
Amen! fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #37
Right on. It's a slur to say all homophobes are secretly gay. Politicub Dec 2012 #52
Original Intent DallasNE Dec 2012 #22
Kick (nt) muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #31
haha randomtagger Dec 2012 #33
f randomtagger Dec 2012 #32
Supreme buffoon and faux scholar The Wizard Dec 2012 #38
"supreme buffoon" is so fitting, thanks wordpix Dec 2012 #46
Buffoon yes The Wizard Dec 2012 #49
"It isn't a living document," Scalia said. "It's dead, dead, dead, dead." morningfog Dec 2012 #39
Yep, that's Rabid Dog Scalia for you... primavera Dec 2012 #42
True fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #50
Scalia is just pissy that he is on the cusp of losing his homophobic war Politicub Dec 2012 #53
Careful: our "pro gun progressives"* consider that homophobe a big hero of theirs: apocalypsehow Dec 2012 #57
Yea fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #58

CanonRay

(14,220 posts)
26. His Prop 8 vote is a given
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:56 AM
Dec 2012

The Constitution means whatever the hell he wants it to mean at the moment.

Dustlawyer

(10,502 posts)
3. Well it seems that a majority of citizens no longer think sodomy is immoral. Scalia, you
Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:45 PM
Dec 2012

Shite head, you need to experience it yourself! He has never heard of the separation of church and state. He needs to go back and read that dead document to see what it says about how we are all equal...

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
5. He Used The Same BS Argument in Lawrence v. Texas
Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:58 PM
Dec 2012

He Used The Same BS Argument in Lawrence v. Texas which overturned Bowers v. Hardwick.

One of the proudest things I ever did was to protest in civil disobedience at the Supreme Court the Bowers ruling. To this day, there has never been a larger civil disobedience action at the Supreme Court. Over 800 people got arrested.

I never thought I'd live to see the day that Bowers would be overturned. Thank goodness it was.

Scalia actually comments in his dissent that the Lawrence case would give license for the state to recognize gay marriage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

aquart

(69,014 posts)
8. Gosh, I hope that arthritis isn't horribly, achingly, endlessly painful.
Mon Dec 10, 2012, 11:28 PM
Dec 2012

That hand ain't good for much, is it?

former9thward

(32,267 posts)
29. No, Scalia was confirmed with a 98-0 vote.
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 02:21 PM
Dec 2012

He not questioned on his views on controversial subjects. No one wanted to be on the record opposing the first Italian-American to be nominated.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
12. Ironically
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 12:02 AM
Dec 2012

What's ironic is the fact that he subscribes to theology of Rome who fund anti-gay marriage equality organizations, when quite frankly, Catholics support gay marriage more than the general population.

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
27. Scalia is an alleged Opus Dei memberi. They don't care what most Catholics think.
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 12:26 PM
Dec 2012

They are True Believers.


The WASPs that think they run this country are only fooling themselves, the real power in our government looks to Rome.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
13. More
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 12:24 AM
Dec 2012

'It isn't a living document," Scalia said. "It's dead, dead, dead, dead."


His version of the Constitution is dead as is his soul. My Constitution is relevant and alive today.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
10. He does have a point. Legislatures make laws on all sorts of things.
Mon Dec 10, 2012, 11:45 PM
Dec 2012

Smoking, motorcycle helmets, having health insurance - these things all get legislated. It isn't up to judges to overrule the will of the people as written in laws, assuming the laws don't violate the constitution.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
11. Difference is NONE of your Examples Are People
Mon Dec 10, 2012, 11:59 PM
Dec 2012

Gay people are NOT a behavior.

We stopped being a 'behavior' when we became subjected to violence and discrimination for how we were born.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
23. Actually health care is for people. But that's beside the point. The point is...
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:26 AM
Dec 2012

...that if you want change, you work through legislation to change laws. If you don't like sodomy laws or motorcycle helmet laws or whatever, repeal them. Don't expect our judges to just make up rulings based on their personal preferences.

If judges made rulings based on personal preferences, some of them would be based on justice and what is right - and others would be whatever the judge thinks is right. Better to have them stick to the law and not make stuff up.

Paladin

(28,327 posts)
24. I Think Scalia's Personal Preferences Are Constantly In Play.
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:36 AM
Dec 2012

He may put on an orignalist show of supposedly filtering things through an eighteenth century lens, but it is his own personal prejudices at work in every decision in which he participates. Short version: He's making things up, and we're suffering because of it.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
34. Huh?
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 05:34 PM
Dec 2012

It's not about 'personal preferences.'

It's about the law and the Constitution.

Judicial review legally authorizes the courts to throw out any law that is unconstitutional. Oh, and for the record, the Court did throw out so-do-my neighbor laws.

And YES, I do expect the Court to uphold the Constitution. For the record, the Equal Protection clause means I cannot be treated differently than you unless there is a state interest in who I love and sleep with.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
40. As I said, it is not about personal preferences. Glad you agree.
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:06 PM
Dec 2012

I'm glad you support courts upholding the Constitution. States make and municipalities make all sorts of laws about lots of moral and health issues, such as smoking, drugs, treatment of animals and yes, sexual issues. Not saying I support all these laws, but thats what lawmaking bodies do - they make laws. If you don't like anti-sodomy laws, get your government to make sodomy legal.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
43. And Guess What Courts Do?
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:14 PM
Dec 2012

They throw out sodomy laws and any other law unconstitutional.

See our Constitution has a safety net against the oppression of the majority.

Get it?

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
44. Courts are unreliable. You can't count on them to rule with the law.
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:26 PM
Dec 2012

That's why we need our legistlatures to make just and good laws. If overreaching legilatures weren't throwing you off the roof, we would not have to rely on court safety nets - that might or might not work. Get it?

Or do you prefer unjust laws and rely on the hope that some unelected judge will save you?

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
45. Right
Wed Dec 12, 2012, 12:17 AM
Dec 2012

Tell you what......you go ahead and do that.

I have no voting representative in either the House or the Senate. They are not accountable to me any other DC resident where we are governed and taxed by your government.

The 'morality' of what you consider to be your awe inspiring legislature has served you well. Not so much for me. I'm sure you have a solution for that as well.

Courts serve a legitimate purpose just as legislatures do when the people (all the people) elect them.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
48. So Predictable
Wed Dec 12, 2012, 11:56 AM
Dec 2012

Last edited Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Sounds no different than the 'love it or leave' mantra the right espoused in the 60s.

YOU should be fighting to insure ALL citizens have the right to vote. How about let's just deny you the right to vote for living in the US. Arrogance.

PS- There is nothing in the Constitution that does not allow DC citizens to have voting representation in the House and in fact we have had numerous time in the past. The Senate is reserved to two per state. Click on hyperlinks below to learn about your 'democratic republic'.

But alas this is all off topic other than to point out what you don't seem to know.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
59. Off Topic
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:50 PM
Dec 2012

I'm sure the British told the colonies the same thing.

PS- I have to sell my property, find a new job and move so I can have the right to have voting representation in Congress on guns or anything else.

Jeez......and they say Republicans try to deny people the right to vote.

Repugnant.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
60. You probably shouldn't have bought in DC.
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:57 PM
Dec 2012

Yes, it is hard to find a new job and sell a house for a good deal in this economy, but unless you're hundreds of years old, you knew the deal when you moved in. I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who put themselves in a situation and then complain about it. Same thing if you moved next to a dairy farm and then were surprised by the smell.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
62. Repugnant
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:00 AM
Dec 2012

Put themselves in that situation??????

You don't know me!

You don't know how many generations my house has been in my family.

And what the f¥ck does it matter. I'm a law abiding tax paying citizen.

Guess you just don't like how my representative would vote on gun laws.

Repugnant.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
66. My problem is uptight Washingtonians who view the world through a narrow lens.
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:27 AM
Dec 2012

People can disagree with you and not be evil. I wish you could see that.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
70. Right
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:36 AM
Dec 2012

...and I bet THEY have the right to vote.

The hypocrisy comes from arrogant folks who predicate their decision to support voting representation on whether they support this or that ....gun.....law or whether they live in a part of the country THEY want us to live.

But heh...keep telling yourself I live with narrow lens.

You do realize that DC has the highest percentage of Obama supporters in the country? And more Democrats per capita than any state? So again, what's your problem?

Sounds like you have a problem with Democrats, democracy, our party platform position on guns and our Presidents comments on guns in the second debate.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
74. And you don't live in the lens, you SEE through the narrow lens.
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:42 AM
Dec 2012

How can you live in a lens?

But I'm sure if you did live in a lens, you'd demand that it have US senators.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
56. You do have the right to vote. But as a US citizen who is not a citizen of a state, no reps for you.
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:23 PM
Dec 2012

Maybe one of your teachers could explain it to you.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
61. Maybe Someone Should Explain to You
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:57 PM
Dec 2012

DC has had voting representation in Congress in the past.

Maybe that same teacher should have taught you that we do not live in a democratic republic.

Perhaps you just don't want me to have voting representation in Congress because that representative would vote for strong gun control laws.

And all this time I thought only Republicans were repugnant with their voting suppression.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
64. We do live in a republic and one of the things that keeps it that way
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:24 AM
Dec 2012

is having a capital city that is not part of one of the states. That way, no state has undue control over the federal government. Sorry, if my crime is loving the constitution too much, I'm guilty as charged!

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
67. Nonsense
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:28 AM
Dec 2012

A republic elects representatives who vote on things like gun control for a well regulated militia.

We are not a republic or a democracy thanks to so called 'patriotic' flag bearing hypocritical people like you.

When we become a republic, my representative will vote for gun control.

Deal with it.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
73. But my point is that it wouild be BETTER if we made good laws and didn't leave it up to
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:40 AM
Dec 2012

unlected judges like Scalia or Ginsburg or whoever.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
78. As soon as you live in a STATE. And not in a district.
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:57 AM
Dec 2012

DC will be a state in, oh, I don't know, maybe NEVER years. If you want the rights that come from living in a state, move to a state.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
79. So the State is More Important than the People
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:02 AM
Dec 2012

So the State is More Important than the People.

Got it.

You do realize no other jurisdiction has more Democrats than DC?

Should we simply change parties first?

We do not live in a Republic.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
82. "The State" as you call it is not more important than people. But states are more ...
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:10 AM
Dec 2012

important in congress than districts are. Just the way things work. Deal with it.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
83. That's super!
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:16 AM
Dec 2012

And as I understand it, you want to name your state after Christopher Columbus.

I would totally support statehood for Puerto Rico, though.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
84. Right
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:23 AM
Dec 2012

Citizens in one pay federal income taxes and citizens in other don't.

Can I ask who you voted for?

Oh, never mind.....

Exhibit A - Voter suppression of Democrats.
Exhibit B - Pay no taxes.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
75. Nah
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:49 AM
Dec 2012

Nah... I have ABSOLUTELY no voting representation in Congress who can vote on guns or anything else in your flag waiving government.

Bet they taught you we live in a republic.

Politicub

(12,165 posts)
51. This is America, and civil liberties are the people's birthright.
Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:40 PM
Dec 2012

No one is giving us gays anything. We are claiming what is rightly ours as citizens.

The motorcycle helmet thing is just silly.

Pterodactyl

(1,687 posts)
54. I agree. The government REQUIRING motor cycle helmets infringes on the rights...
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:18 PM
Dec 2012

...of people who were born wanting to ride motorcycles withiout helmets.

elleng

(131,820 posts)
19. He explained:
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 01:01 AM
Dec 2012

"It's a form of argument that I thought you would have known, which is called the 'reduction to the absurd,'" Scalia told freshman Duncan Hosie of San Francisco during the question-and-answer period. "If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against other things?"

Scalia said he is not equating sodomy with murder but drawing a parallel between the bans on both.

fightthegoodfightnow

(7,042 posts)
35. immoral
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 05:41 PM
Dec 2012

What's absurd is to reject the notion that treating people differently because of who they love is not only a clear violation of the Equal Protection Clause, but is also immoral.

What's absurd is that the morality of discrimination is not questioned by him (or for that matter you), but 'reasoned' into the 'reduction of the absurd'.

Any comparison is simply absurd.

Socal31

(2,484 posts)
21. Myself and many others have theory about those who spend so much time and energy
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 01:46 AM
Dec 2012

Myself and many others have theory a about those who spend so much time and energy denouncing certain lifestyle choices.......

It goes something like eventually being found at a rest-stop with a meth pipe and a male escort....

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
28. Being gay is not a 'lifestyle choice' and most virulent anti gay activists are straight
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 01:37 PM
Dec 2012

like Antonin as well as hyper religious like Antonin. The meme that anti gay straights are actuall gay people is a way for the straight community to evade responsiblity for dealing with the hate mongers among them.

Politicub

(12,165 posts)
52. Right on. It's a slur to say all homophobes are secretly gay.
Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:42 PM
Dec 2012

I'm sure some are, but its a tiny minority of opportunists or the self loathing.

DallasNE

(7,413 posts)
22. Original Intent
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 03:56 AM
Dec 2012
Scalia said that interpreting laws requires adherence to the words used and to their meanings at the time they were written.


On the surface that doesn't sound so unreasonable until you look at the context of those statements and realize that that world no longer exists. The words used have little value because you cannot reasonably overlay them on top of current conditions. What, for instance, did our Founding Fathers have to say about global warming. How does the Court rule on such issues when they come before the Court. This is in fact what the Court faced in Roe v Wade. It is impossible for the Court to interpret laws by "adherence to the words used and to their meanings at the time they were written" when the issue was unknowable at the time.

The Wizard

(12,572 posts)
38. Supreme buffoon and faux scholar
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:59 PM
Dec 2012

Whenever Nino The Fixer gets confronted with a legal question that doesn't fall within his narrow vision his fall back response is "It's not in the Constitution."
The Air Force isn't in the Constitution either as are many things and issues that didn't exist at the Country's inception and subsequent amendments thereof. A fraud by any other name........

The Wizard

(12,572 posts)
49. Buffoon yes
Wed Dec 12, 2012, 01:20 PM
Dec 2012

but still one of the greatest threats to American ideals and democracy itself. He should be impeached with prejudice.

 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
39. "It isn't a living document," Scalia said. "It's dead, dead, dead, dead."
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:41 PM
Dec 2012

Scalia, you obstructionist asshole.

primavera

(5,191 posts)
42. Yep, that's Rabid Dog Scalia for you...
Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:10 PM
Dec 2012

... but he did write the Heller opinion, so the gungeon DUers still love him.

Politicub

(12,165 posts)
53. Scalia is just pissy that he is on the cusp of losing his homophobic war
Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:45 PM
Dec 2012

And his big mouth is going to ensure he goes down in history as one of the most reviled judges. Some legacy.

apocalypsehow

(12,751 posts)
57. Careful: our "pro gun progressives"* consider that homophobe a big hero of theirs:
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:30 PM
Dec 2012

he receives non-stop cheers and accolades down in the Gungeon.


*( )

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Confronted by NJ Princeto...