Rising Hegemon
The Aspen Times reported Sunday that Scalia drew upon the Holocaust as an example of how judicial activism can lead to problems. According to the Utah Bar Association's website, Scalia was slated to be the keynote speaker for the 2013 Summer Convention event, which was held from July 17-20 in Snowmass, Colo.Well, there is one person...totally fair comparison to this guy. But please do go on Tony:
"We have become addicted to abstract moralizing," Scalia said last month. "I am questioning the sanity of having value-laden judgments made by judges."Yeah, Scalia would never do any of that "value-laden judgment" thing.
The Texas statute [criminalizing sodomy] undeniably seeks to further the belief of its citizens that certain forms of sexual behavior are "immoral and unacceptable," Bowers, supra, at 196-the same interest furthered by criminal laws against fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality, and obscenity.Yes, gay sex = incest, obscenity and/or bestiality, no value judgments there.
[cross-posted at Firedoglake]
7 comments:
Hmm, I'm sure that Scalia understands that some Texans want fornicators, homosexuals, lippy teenagers and blasphemers stoned to death, too.
Some of them, in fact, won't be happy until there's only a handful of people (all members of the state Republican Party) left in the entire state. I think Scalia understands this, too. This is why they like him.
HuffPo missed part of the quote:
of argument, that sexual orgies eliminate social tensions and ought to be encouraged,” he said, earning a few laughs from the Utah lawyers. “Rather, I am questioning the propriety, indeed the sanity, of having a value-laden decision such as that made for the entire society by unelected judges.”
I believe an ice cold can of Coke has been raised in assent.
"... an ice cold can of Coke has been raised in assent."
One, no doubt, with a pubic hair on it....
I see the TX legislators left a small loophole. Adult incest?
“I believe that texts should be read to mean what they were understood to mean when they were adopted,” he explained.
In other words, he sees the Constitution as a “static document” that means the same thing now as it did at the time of its creation.
Oh yeah? Then how come you never mention the words "well regulated militia", a$$hole?
well, icky is not a legal term.
just because he's on the supremes does that mean he can't be subject to the bar association or to whatever regulatory group there is to oversee judges. isn't there a censure or a disbarment to keep bad judges from judging?
Post a Comment