[ThePythonicCow]

Though, on the other hand, Scalia has a vigorous dissent, at ROY ROMER, GOVERNOR OF COLORADO, et al., PETITIONERS v. RICHARD G. EVANS et al., pointing out that whether

the proposition that opposition to homosexuality is as reprehensible as racial or religious bias ... is precisely the cultural debate that gave rise to the Colorado constitutional amendment (and to the preferential laws against which the amendment was directed). Since the Constitution of the United States says nothing about this subject, it is left to be resolved by normal democratic means, including the democratic adoption of provisions in state constitutions. This Court has no business imposing upon all Americans the resolution favored by the elite class from which the Members of this institution are selected, pronouncing that "animosity" toward homosexuality, ante, at 13, is evil. I vigorously dissent.

He clearly disagrees that the Constitution plainly speaks to this issue, so would leave it to the normal democratic process and individual states.

I certainly have to respect his opinion. Whenever I find myself disagreeing with Scalia on a matter of constitutional law, my presumption is that I am wrong.

Clearly, in any case, this is not a wedge issue that should divide support for Roberts in half. There is nothing here from which one can conclude that Roberts fidelity to the constitution is in grave doubt.

[puroresu]

Scalia was correct in his dissent. The majority ruling in Romer was based on political correctness, not on the Constitution.

[rollo tomasi]

Scalia is pointing out homosexuality is never mentioned in the Constitution.

Religion and the human race are though.

If the founders, those who created various State Constitutions, etc... approved of this behavior they would have never made it illegal in the first place.

The people of Colorado have every right to protect their basic values if they so choose, there is nothing unconstitutional about Amendment 2.

Homosexuality was and is considered a perverted behavior when Amendments 1-10 as well as 14th were approved.

If one has perverted sex keep it amongst themselves but like Scalia said:

"[Amendment 2 is] a modest attempt by seemingly tolerant Coloradans to preserve traditional sexual mores against the efforts of a politically powerful minority to revise those mores through use of the laws. That objective, and the means chosen to achieve it, are [...] unimpeachable under any constitutional doctrine hitherto pronounced."