Skip to comments.Justice Scalia Defends Controversial Opinions About Gays At Princeton
Posted on 12/11/2012 9:58:12 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia went to head to head Monday night with a gay student at Princeton University over the jurist's opinions about homosexuality.
Duncan Hosie took issue with Scalia equating laws banning sodomy to laws against bestiality and murder.
"It's a form of argument that I thought you would have known, which is called the 'reduction to the absurd,'" Scalia said, according to the Associated Press. "If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against other things?"
The high court's most outspoken justice stressed he wasn't equating sodomy and murder, but rather the bans on both, the AP reported.
Scalia's views on homosexuality will be a huge source of debate in March, when the court is scheduled to hear arguments in the two gay marriage cases it recently agreed to take on.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
What is controversial about refusing to act as though a mental illness is normal behavior?
Judge Scalia - do you really think that the average American bloke can understand your fine distinctions? The people who had their heads up their a$$e$ Nov 2008 and Nov 2012? And do you think the media won’t deliberately say that you think homosexuality and murder are the same thing?
Shocking that sodomites would take issue with someone pointing out how deviant their behavior is. At least Christians don’t behead them like muslims.
If everyone did it, what would happen?
Ans. The human race would be wiped out.
I’ve been praying for God to bring us some sign of impending doom. This world is becoming woefully bizarre and absurd in almost every way.
Everything I’ve learned and been taught in my life is now “abnormal.” Life without debt? Preposterous! Married to a woman for life? Outrageous! Kids raised in a home with a man and a woman? Laughable! Eat a home cooked meal at a dining room table with the TV off? So passé!
There’s nothing left for me to aspire to. There’s nothing great to look forward to. This is what the hedonists and sodomites want. They want us to be equal in their misery. Socialism is about shared poverty.
Since I was about 10 years old, I've asked myself that question in exactly those words to self-discover moral behavior.
Religion, ethics, and other systematic training and principles are also welcome. But if everyone just looked at that question and behaved accordingly, the world would be much better off.
RE: Judge Scalia - do you really think that the average American bloke can understand your fine distinctions?
Scalia is giving a talk in Princeton. He is assuming that these students are intelligent enough to UNDERSTAND his fine distinctions.
Liberals want to force you to think they way they insist. You are not allowed to have natural revulsion responses and make up your own mind about things. That would be bigoted.
Why would a distinguished jurist like Justice Scalia waste his time talking to a Duncan Hosie at liberal Princeton. His words would go right over their pointed heads.
All any of this amounts to is the leftist revolution. Every dissenting voice is to be silenced. Until we wake up and start fighting the left, more and more bad things will happen.
In the end, all their deviant and stupid behavior will be protected, all your traditional behavior will be criminalized.
Example, kids’ books with traditional families are now attacked as “homophobic”.
Degenerates are degenerates. I’ve had these arguments here in L.A. with the faggots. And the MOST known reply back is because they are “different”.
If you were born a man, and you act like a woman, how is this considered normal?
Now if a man was born a man and acts like a dishwasher, car, thinks he’s Superman, a dog, a lampshade, they automatically get straight-jacketed. But as a woman,? NOOOOOOOOOO
The heading itself is an interesting case study in propaganda. Note the use of the word “defends” and the description of HIS opinion as “controversial.” Note the difference in tone with this headline: “Student Pushes Controversial Opinion of Homosexuality” or “Student Attempts to Push Controversial Sodomy Acceptance Views on Supreme Court Justice.” It’s done in so many ways, but the use of words like “controversial,” “defend(s),” and “admits,” along with any word ending in “-phobia” are common propaganda tools.
I’d say your prayers for a sign of impending doom have been answered many times in the last two decades!
Freudian-style psychology had us labeling it “mental illness”, which was the beginning of the left’s death-by-a-thousand-cuts removal of responsibility of the criminal’s actions from the criminal.
I’m only 32. I’ve only been awake enough to notice them for the last 10 or so.
I think that a better comparison would be the laws against sodomy and bestiality, rather than murder. We have been reduced to determining whether an animal enjoyed the sexual act in order to decide the criminality of sodomy in WA State, where some of the most highly publicized bestiality cases have taken place.
Should it also be illegal to express moral outrage over bestiality?
Scalia can think.
It’s pretty obvious that certain Princeton students cannot.
I’m amazed that Scalia was even allowed to speak — that he was (1) invited by such a leftist body as Princeton and (2) not shouted down by organized leftist goons.