Okay, when you think Supreme Court what do you imagine? Contemplative reflection and solemn sober discourse when deciding some of the most far reaching cases in America? That is what I thought of, or at least what I want to think occurs in the highest court in the land.
But then I think about Scalia and a cold chill makes it’s way down my spine. It was a sad day indeed when Grandpa Reagan replaced a man like Warren Burger with Antonin Scalia and to add insult to injury, appoint William Rhenquist Chief Justice. Even if you felt that the Warren led Supreme Court was too liberal (and for some I imagine it was) at least the justices comported themselves with the dignity we should be able to expect from someone in their positions. Antonin Scalia is as of late behaving more like a childish ultra christian homophobe than a respected jurist.
After being asked to recuse himself after making the statement “We could eliminate ‘under God’ from the Pledge of Allegiance. That could be democratically done,” he said. But he added that would be “contrary to our whole tradition.”, which kind of indicates a bias on his part (unless what he was saying that removing it democratically would be against our tradition – he could arguably be correct in that assessment). So, good…he is off that case but what of his future influence?
The following plopped out of his maw during an address to the ultra conservative puppy mill known as the Intercollegiate Studies Institute:
The ruling, Scalia said, “held to be a constitutional right what had been a criminal offense at the time of the founding and for nearly 200 years thereafter.”
Scalia adopted a mocking tone to read from the court’s June ruling that struck down state anti-sodomy laws in Texas and elsewhere.
Okay, I get it…he does not like homosexuals. That is his deal. But as a justice of my Supreme Court I would expect a bit more reflection on the rights of approximately 10% of the population than to say “well it was illegal when the founding father’s wrote the Constitution so it should be illegal now”. Well they rode horses in Jefferson’s day as opposed to driving gas guzzling SUV’s and they churned their own butter rather than run to the corner store for a tub of Shed-Spread. Is he suggesting that we turn back the hands of time because progress is NOT what the founding father’s had in mind? I seriously doubt it. If he is then he should give up his day job and let a sane person help shape the law.
I know that I go off on a lot of these type of stories (when I actually contribute something:)) and it probably looks like my venom is directed at religion or conservatives and while I do not argue that those two groups seem to have taken up permanent residence up my nose I am mainly angered at the constant persecution of a group of people who happen to differ from us only in their sexual proclivities. If it isn’t happening to you why the hell do you care if two consenting adults are enjoying themselves in their own home? Isn’t life hard enough without people making up reasons to persecute others?
If you have that much time on your hands take a continuing education course.