Fox News Attacks Barney Frank For Accurately Characterizing Scalia’s Views As Homophobic
Fox News Attacks Barney Frank For Accurately Characterizing Scalia’s Views As Homophobic
In a recent interview with gay news site 365gay.com, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) said he hopes the Supreme Court takes up the issue of gay marriage — but not with its current conservative makeup, led by “that homophobe Antonin Scalia.” Not surprisingly, Scalia’s defenders at Fox News decried Frank’s comments, insisting that Scalia doesn’t attack the gay community directly. “Homophobe is a really strong word,” scolded Fox Supreme Court reporter Shannon Bream. Other Fox hosts leaped to Scalia’s defense:
MEGYN KELLY: In defense of Justice Scalia, in that dissent Lawrence v. Texas, he wasn’t necessarily harsh, he just made clear his position…on homosexual sodomy.
BREAM: There was no direct attack by Justice Scalia on the homosexual community, nothing along those lines. It was a very technical legal argument.
Sean Hannity insisted Scalia is “one of the most brilliant jurists of all time. Absolutely!” Watch a compilation:
The truth is that Scalia’s animus toward gay people is clear. During oral arguments for the 2003 case Lawrence v. Texas — in which the Court struck down Texas’ law making gay sex illegal — Scalia suggested that being gay was somehow contagious, and that a teacher could “induce” a student toward homosexuality:
Rehnquist wonders whether, if these laws are stuck down, states can have laws “preferring non-homosexuals to homosexuals as kindergarten teachers.” Smith replies that there would need to be some showing that gay kindergarten teachers produce harm to children. Scalia offers one: “Only that children might be induced to follow the path to homosexuality.”
Scalia is no less extreme in his writing. In his dissent for the 1996 case Romer v. Evans, Scalia compared homosexuality to murder and polygamy:
Of course it is our moral heritage that one should not hate any human being or class of human beings. But I had thought that one could consider certain conduct reprehensible — murder, for example, or polygamy, or cruelty to animals — and could exhibit even “animus” toward such conduct. Surely that is the only sort of “animus” at issue here: moral disapproval of homosexual conduct.”
And in his dissent for Lawrence v. Texas, Scalia said that laws against gay sex served “the same interest” as laws against incest and bestiality:
The Texas statute 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.
Scalia frequently employs the rhetoric of the extreme right. Sounding like a conspiracy theorist, Scalia said it was “preposterous” to categorize gay people as “politically unpopular” when they are a group “which enjoys enormous influence in American media and politics.” And concluding his Lawrence dissent, Scalia blasted the Court’s majority for having “signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I wonder if Scalia needs to come out of the closet? Seems like the only ones really interested in homosexual sex are college boys looking for threesomes, and closeted right wingers.
March 24th, 2009 at 11:57 amI guess Shannon Bream and Megyn Kelly are gay. Otherwise, they should probably defer to the gay guy in regard to what qualifies someone as a homophobe.
March 24th, 2009 at 11:58 amMEGYN KELLY: In defense of Justice Scalia, in that dissent Lawrence v. Texas, he wasn’t necessarily harsh, he just made clear his position…on homosexual sodomy.
So, her argument is that Scalia doesn’t mind gay people just as long as they don’t do anything gay?
March 24th, 2009 at 12:01 pmWas this article posted in honor of bitblt’s appearance this morning?
We all know how bit loves threads about Teh Gay.
Almost as much as Daryll.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:02 pmMEGYN KELLY: In defense of Justice Scalia, in that dissent Lawrence v. Texas, he wasn’t necessarily harsh, he just made clear his position…on homosexual sodomy.
I’m guessing his position is behind.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:04 pmI have repeatedly asked my gay friends if I could borrow their copy of “teh gay agenda” and all they ever do is scratch their heads and admit they don’t have one.
Perhaps I should ask GOOPers, seeing how many of them are closeted gays*.
(My gay friends all find THAT joke to be funny, BTW, w/ the disclaimer, “You’re passing those freaks – GOOPers – off on us…”)
March 24th, 2009 at 12:04 pmSean Hannity insisted Scalia is “one of the most brilliant jurists of all time. Absolutely!”
How come all the Neocons aren’t just good, but over the top?
Remember bush was the most brilliant president of all time, too.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:04 pmoh 0 here we go – this one ought to send Daryll into an orgasmic frenzy
March 24th, 2009 at 12:04 pmI think Parodyll went into hiding after we found out his wife has the gestation period of an elephant.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:08 pmJust sayin…
the bigots have free rein … it’s all so disgusting…
Conservative radio host Tammy Bruce “trashes” the Obamas
http://news.google.com/news?pz=1&ned=us&ncl=1319659699
March 24th, 2009 at 12:09 pmscalia was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court by President ronald reagan.
When your president’s an actor, something’s wrong.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:12 pmHmmm…it seems that Scalia left no “fear teh gay!” meme untouched. He couldn’t be more of a textbook example of a homophobe if he tried.
Barney Frank merely referred to Scalia as a homophobe because he is one.
Fox News is attempting to claim that an animal who looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck isn’t a duck. And they do this by saying stupid things like “In defense of Justice Scalia, in that dissent Lawrence v. Texas, he wasn’t necessarily harsh, he just made clear his position…on homosexual sodomy”.
In other words, he’s not a homophobe, he’s just fearful of and bigoted toward gays. Right. Got it.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:12 pmThe think about Fox News is that they never offer the full context of a debate. They simply say this is something to be outraged over and start having bobbleheads expressing that outrage. The lack on intellectual curiosity it takes to sit through a program with O’Reilly or Hannity is mind numbing.
http://www.pufferfishblog.com/
March 24th, 2009 at 12:12 pmWhy are they defending Scalia exactly? Are they saying homophobia is “wrong”? If so, that is the real news story. I thought that totally kosher for Fox because Leviticus told them so.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:15 pmI don’t know if “homophobe” is the right word. I’d call Scalia a damn bigot. I don’t think that Scalia’s hateful logic comes from a place of fear, but rather from a political calculation.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:18 pmkaty Says
March 24th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Conservative radio host Tammy Bruce “trashes” the Obamas
_____________________________________________________________
Yeah, I saw this one. The wingnuts apparently can’t decide if the Obamas (and Michelle in particular) are “elite snobs” or “trash”.
I was also amused by Bruce’s definition of trash — “Trash, are people who use other people to get things, who patronize others, who consider you bitter and clingy…”
Of course, Bruce provided no evidence that Michelle Obama was any of these things. Just more baseless wingnut vitriol.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:18 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
(My gay friends all find THAT joke to be funny, BTW, w/ the disclaimer, “You’re passing those freaks – GOOPers – off on us…”)
Oooops… that SHOULD say… You’re NOT passing those freaks off on us…
March 24th, 2009 at 12:18 pm“Only that children might be induced to follow the path to homosexuality.”
Is there something you need to tell the public about your childhood Scalia?
March 24th, 2009 at 12:18 pmOh No! Not the Gays again! I have never understood the Righties hatred of homosexuals. For a Party whose Red States are the ones who watch the most pornograpghy, they certainly act chaste don’t they?
March 24th, 2009 at 12:20 pmNotice how the dittoheads had to qualify it? No “direct” attack.
A closet bigot is still a bigot.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:22 pmTammy Bruce?
The self-proclaimed gun-toting, conservative lesbian?
Whoa… talk about cognitive dissonance… gittin’ a splitting headache from just typing that line. Huh? What the…?? The… the… room just went dark…
Ooops… just closed my eyes fer a second… thas all… heh… my bad. Carry on…
March 24th, 2009 at 12:22 pmThe truth is that Scalia’s animus toward gay people is clear. During oral arguments for the 2003 case Lawrence v. Texas — in which the Court struck down Texas’ law making gay sex illegal — Scalia suggested that being gay was somehow contagious, and that a teacher could “induce” a student toward homosexuality:
Rehnquist wonders whether, if these laws are stuck down, states can have laws “preferring non-homosexuals to homosexuals as kindergarten teachers.” Smith replies that there would need to be some showing that gay kindergarten teachers produce harm to children. Scalia offers one: “Only that children might be induced to follow the path to homosexuality.”
Yeah sure , and if Jeffrey Dahmer was my teacher instead , I’d be pre-disposed to wanting to become a serial killer and to eat my victims organs ?
How the fu(k did morons like this ever get beyond having a Judge Judy type of show , much less be placed upon the SCOTUS ?
March 24th, 2009 at 12:23 pmYou know Faux can’t ignore one of their own being called a word that includes the word ‘homo’ in it! For them that’s just another knee jerk reaction.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:24 pmThis item has once again reminded me that I am:
1. a Scaliaphobe and
2. the exact opposite of a Foxophile.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:25 pmYeah, Scalia protesteth WAYYYYY too much. He’s a total closet case. C’mon, folks! There must be somebody who has done this freak and can out him!
March 24th, 2009 at 12:25 pmThe sooner the better.
Uh oh. Scalia’s sphinker is sure to pucker up when he sees this news item.
Vermont’s Senate just voted overwhelmingly to convert their civil unions law into a civil marriage law:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/03/this-is-how-you.html
March 24th, 2009 at 12:28 pmThere’s more than one way to earn straight A’s at the Catholic School, right Tino??
March 24th, 2009 at 12:31 pmWhenever I pause to reflect upon some of the major immoral acts of history—the Holocaust, the Russian Pogroms, the Rwanda genocide, the Pol Pot genocide, Darfur, Biafra, the transatlantic slave trade, Apartheid, the current Iraq ‘War’, Iran-Contra, the Opium War and so on, somehow neither homosexual love, nor lust, nor oral sex or ‘buttseks’ seems to have been a contributing factor.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:33 pmBecause when you don’t really believe something and desperately want to believe it, emphatic repetition sometimes helps, I’m told.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:35 pmDr. Hussein Matt Says:
The Republic of Stupidity Says:
Tammy Bruce? The self-proclaimed gun-toting, conservative lesbian?
To be precise, the former librul turned conservative, lesbian, pro-choice, gun-toting, and self-loathing hack.
___________
Geez… thanks. The first line was hard enought to comprehend.
Yours is going to put me in bed for the rest of the day…
Dang… where’d I put that Tylenol?
March 24th, 2009 at 12:35 pmMEGYN KELLY: In defense of Justice Scalia, in that dissent Lawrence v. Texas, he wasn’t necessarily harsh, he just made clear his position…on homosexual sodomy.
Really? And what deep dark closeted homosexual sodomy position would that be, Scalia?
March 24th, 2009 at 12:37 pmAh, yes the party of NO/Bedroom Police are at it again…..F&^%k Faux News.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:38 pmDidn’t FAUX announce recently that they are publicly out of the closet and that they are reichwingnut propagandists?
March 24th, 2009 at 12:38 pmPerhaps this will help explain it:
5. Rampant Sexism – The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:39 pmDRxJ Says:
Really? And what deep dark closeted homosexual sodomy position would that be, Scalia?
______________
And don’t forget… the oral arguments…
March 24th, 2009 at 12:41 pmScalia suggested that being gay was somehow contagious, and that a teacher could “induce” a student toward homosexuality…
__________________________________________________________
I just saw “Milk” over the weekend, and I recommend it to anyone who hasn’t seen it yet. Especially the story of Prop 6 on the 1978 California ballot.
The attitudes toward gays in the 1970s were mind-boggling in their misinformation and bigotry. And when I read stuff like this, it seems some people are still stuck in that mindset. At least Scalia is.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:42 pmRalph,Rampant sexism explains alot about BIllo and company.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:42 pmWasn’t Burt Reynolds and the boys in a red state in the movie Deliverance?
March 24th, 2009 at 12:44 pmIt pisses me off about the hypocrisy. Here, you have Vitter, the jerk in the Madams blackbook. Then you have Spitzer, who was run out of town on a rail. Difference? Vitter is a Religiuos Rightie(???) and Spitzer, a Democrat. Republicans can certainly forgive adulterers, but hate teh gays. Weird.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:46 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
DRxJ Says:
Really? And what deep dark closeted homosexual sodomy position would that be, Scalia?
______________
And don’t forget… the oral arguments…
I guess we also now know why Scalia graduated at the head of his class.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:48 pmWhen I was in school, there were several instances of hetero teachers sexually preying on students, but not once did a gay teacher (and we had ‘em) ever molest a student. I’m not saying it never happens, predators come in all lifestyles, but by sheer numbers the far more pressing issue would be predatory hetero teachers.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:51 pmtombaker Says:
There’s more than one way to earn straight A’s at the Catholic School, right Tino??
Oh, thanks! Now I need to clean off my laptop!
Folks, don’t you just know Daryll is reading and itching to jump in but just can’t because of that lie he trapped himself in? Geez, the immorality of single moms followed by a thread on teh gays. It’s Daryll’s wet dream!
PEACE
March 24th, 2009 at 12:52 pm.
Daryyl, Oh Daryyl…
… Where for art thou, my Daryyl?
.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:53 pmThere’s an Al Gore thread now. All the dingalings will be swarming it for the next 20 hours or so.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:56 pm.
If I’m a threat to someones straight marriage…
… Know it’s not me, but the husband who’s lied to his wife about his sexual preference.
.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:57 pmTammy Bruce is gay; Can we give her back?
Actually, Tammy is, above all else, an economic opportunist. However, she pales in comparison to the ultimate gay tool of the right – Andrew Breitbart.
Related:
March 24th, 2009 at 12:57 pmhttp://www.tips-q.com/content/toture-tammy-bruce-unhinged
http://www.tips-q.com/content/09323-tammy-bruce-gay-could-we-give-her-back
Let’s just pretend Daryll showed up, just for fun, shall we?
1RaptureReady Says: Also, I am only happy because my wife is with child. (2 ½ weeks) February 3rd, 2009 at 4:12 pm
RaptureReady Says: DRxJ Says: Daryll? Sweetie. Please answer the question. How many children do you and your wife have? She is almost a month into pregnancy. March 3rd, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Lying, or can’t count.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:57 pmIf the shoe fits… Scalia is a homophobe! He’s got a history of making homophobic statements and has attempted to demonize homosexuality! All Barney Frank did was make a statement of fact. The folks at “Fake News Station” need to STFU!
March 24th, 2009 at 12:58 pmPLC, are you still feeding your troll?
But seriously, I simply cannot believe that after that smackdown, he’s never appeared again. Talk about a chickensh*t liar! I guess when trolls are exposed to sunlight, they curl up and die.
PEACE
March 24th, 2009 at 1:07 pmI kinda miss Daryll, he’s more enterntaining in his actual self-righteousness than the feigned version these Oreilly trolls are flaunting.
March 24th, 2009 at 1:09 pmNow now, Daryll would not appreciate that slight against him.
March 24th, 2009 at 1:12 pmkaty Says:
——————————————————————————–
the bigots have free rein … it’s all so disgusting…
Conservative radio host Tammy Bruce “trashes” the Obamas
http://news.google.com/ news?pz=1&ned=us&ncl=1319659699
March 24th, 2009 at 1:15 pmOh hell naw! No she didn’t go there?!
My vote for the most likely “Closet Queen of the Supremes” is Roberts, that man is too well groomed to be straight, he’s also got that peter pan twinkle in his eye..
March 24th, 2009 at 1:17 pmOkay guys, what did I miss about Daryll?
March 24th, 2009 at 1:19 pmAlong those lines, Chocolate J, doesn’t Tucker Carlson also dress like a Log Cabin Republican?
March 24th, 2009 at 1:21 pmI think Barney Frank needs to be sodomized by some prisoners because he is not getting enough and because he takes no personal responsibility for doing nothing before the collapse of the financial system and shamelessly promoted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because they gave and still give him campaign $$$.
March 24th, 2009 at 1:37 pmJohnnyOnTheSpot16 Says:
I think Barney Frank needs to be sodomized by some prisoners because he is not getting enough and because he takes no personal responsibility for doing nothing before the collapse of the financial system and shamelessly promoted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because they gave and still give him campaign $$$.
March 24th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
____________
Barney Frank gay reference – check
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac – check
Pelosi’s recession – XXXX
Socialism – XXXX
George Soros – XXXX
Government spending – XXXX
Obama’s inexperience – XXXX
Dude, you suck at trolling. You haven’t even mentioned HALF of the talking points you’re supposed to.
I’m SO not playing Troll Bingo with you any more!!!
March 24th, 2009 at 1:44 pmAs you’ve probably noticed, some of the creepier wingnuts have decided Barney Frank caused the whole economic meltdown.
March 24th, 2009 at 1:50 pmNot only is Frank right about Scalia’s homophobia, he is unfortunately also right that we do not want any major gay rights cases coming before the present Supreme Court. Scalia probably does have the votes to quash progress. The irony, of couse, is that ruling in favor of state prerogative in the case of marriage (ie, recognizing MA’s right to have gay marriage and expecting other states to honor it) and killing DOMA would be the conservative thing to do. But homophobia will carry the day with Scalia and Roberts, not consistency, strict interpretation, and long-established state prerogatives and full faith and credit.
March 24th, 2009 at 1:52 pmGay marriage will be legal.
The right wing should just get over themselves.
The times, they are a changin’!!
March 24th, 2009 at 1:55 pmKrazny Says:
I wonder if Scalia needs to come out of the closet?
March 24th, 2009 at 11:57 am
____________
So does Samuel Alito. He’s been spending way too much time in other people’s closets…
March 24th, 2009 at 1:56 pmraynman Says:
MEGYN KELLY: In defense of Justice Scalia, in that dissent Lawrence v. Texas, he wasn’t necessarily harsh, he just made clear his position…on homosexual sodomy.
So, her argument is that Scalia doesn’t mind gay people just as long as they don’t do anything gay?
So… to recap: men liking men ok, but pee-pee in poo-poo bad.
March 24th, 2009 at 2:19 pmI support the right’s of gays to marry.
But, Frank was wrong to refer to Scalia as ‘that homophobe…’
First, Scalia is just one vote. If he was the only problem, the measure would pass 8 to 1.
Second, and most importantly, Frank referring to Scalia as ‘that homophobe’ would be the same as Scalia (or anyone else) referring to Frank as ‘that homosexual’.
That wouldn’t be appropriate and neither was Frank’s comment.
Frank should apologize for his derogatory characterization of Scalia and clarifly his remarks.
Disagreeing with Scalia’s decisions is very appropriate. Inflammatory characterizations, especially on this topic, are not.
If anyone should know better, it’s Frank.
Here’s Frank in context:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/23/barney-frank-calls-scalia_n_178279.html
March 24th, 2009 at 2:20 pmOh, puleeze – Scalia would be perfectly within his rights to call Frank ‘that homosexual’ BECAUSE HE IS. It would probably cause a titter or two that Scalia was so ‘frank’ in his comments, but so what? I’m sick of this mamby-pamby ‘you must be civilized’ crap. Civilized words have a way of masking a huge and ugly agenda. And in Scalia’s case, it’s the continued demonization of gay people. Derogatory characterization indeed! Scalia IS ‘that homophobe.’
March 24th, 2009 at 2:47 pmFirst, Scalia is just one vote. If he was the only problem, the measure would pass 8 to 1.
Nobody said Scalia is the only problem. Strike one.
Second, and most importantly, Frank referring to Scalia as ‘that homophobe’ would be the same as Scalia (or anyone else) referring to Frank as ‘that homosexual’.
Not equivalent. Homophobic is a choice and descriptive of Scalia’s views. Homosexual is not a choice and not descriptive of Frank’s views. Strike two.
Inflammatory characterizations, especially on this topic, are not. If anyone should know better, it’s Frank.
Scalia’s comments about gays are what are inflammatory, attacking the personhood and “morality” of gays. Scalia owes an apology and, more, a change in his choice of behavior. Strike three.
March 24th, 2009 at 2:50 pmSean Hannity insisted Scalia is “one of the most brilliant jurists of all time.”
Consider the source.
March 24th, 2009 at 2:50 pmThanx, Patriot/Liberal/Christian. You nailed it.
March 24th, 2009 at 2:53 pmIt is disgusting to think that an incompetent boob like Barney is in charge of anything. He was up on his big chair again today running the hearing with Geitner and Bernacke. He makes straight people gross out the same way the San Francisco gay pride parade does. He is a step backward for anyone that cares about gay rights. Scalia is not is the business of changing the law. His job is to interpret the constitution and apply it to the case before him. I know that “progressives” wish they could fill the courts with Kool-Aid drinking liberals, but it doesn’t work that way. The majority still rules with the power of the vote. Thanks Prop 8!!!
March 24th, 2009 at 3:22 pmNow let’s see, JoeyB – you despise Barney Frank because he isn’t good looking enough to be gay? You little minx, you!
The only thing that Scalia interprets is his own ego. If you had watched the 60 Minutes interview awhile back, it’s clear the man makes no decision based on real-world experiences — it’s just an academic exercise for him. He always brings his prejudices to the table. Ever heard of the tyranny of the majority?
March 24th, 2009 at 3:29 pmAnd one other thing…I thought that by interpreting a law, the Supreme Court could actually end up changing it? Or abolishing it?
March 24th, 2009 at 3:31 pmAnd one more thing…perhaps you could do without the quotes around the word progressive. You “conservative” darling, you!
March 24th, 2009 at 3:32 pmAnd it’s not Kool-Aid…it’s Vodka!
March 24th, 2009 at 3:34 pmJohnnyOnTheSpot16 Says:
Well I think YOU are an ignorant brainwashed punk that needs to be beaten severly in hopes of jumpstarting your clearly non functional braincells. What moron you are.
March 24th, 2009 at 3:46 pmJoeyB Says:
YOU dont speak for all straight people. First of all you are a moron and most of us arent. Second your bigotry is an embarassment to decent people. YOU gross me out.Abject stupidity always seems to do that and you just spew ignorance like water off a ducks back. You embarass our entire species. If chanelling Bozo the Clown is the best you can do then you just arent going to be any fun at all.
March 24th, 2009 at 3:51 pmPLC. I disagree.
Frank singled out Scalia as if it was he alone that was ruling against gay marriage. He is one justice of nine. Why not call out the other 5 or more that have cast votes against gay marriage?
Again, if it were only Scalia obstructing the measures, the measures would pass 8 to 1.
And if someone where to come here and refer to ‘that homosexual, Barney Frank’, they would sound as bigoted as Frank did when he single-out Scalia as ‘that homophobe, Scalia’.
For you to suggest that most people wouldn’t find that bigoted, is partisan denial and wishful thinking.
Frank was wrong. He should apologize to Scalia.
March 24th, 2009 at 3:55 pmGeeDubs. Try this out and prove me wrong. Go over to this thread:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/24/terkel-media/
and post something innocuous, like this, to see if people think it’s bigoted:
“What we need is to get that homosexual, Barney Frank on Olbermann”.
I could be wrong. Show me.
March 24th, 2009 at 4:06 pmnothin’ shames The Devil more than callin’ Him out by Name!!!!
March 24th, 2009 at 4:07 pmfckup, being homosexual is not something to be ashamed of, it’s like being red haired. Homophobic is something to be ashamed of, it’s like hating someone because they have red hair.
See the difference dipshit?
March 24th, 2009 at 4:09 pmbackup Says:
WRONG all over the place.
Frank singled out Scalia as if it was he alone that was ruling against gay marriage. He is one justice of nine. Why not call out the other 5 or more that have cast votes against gay marriage?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
IF all he had done was vote against it that would be one thing but his statements and his writings show sheer unadulterated homophobia.
Again, if it were only Scalia obstructing the measures, the measures would pass 8 to 1.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Non sequitur he isnt being called a homophobe because he is the “only one obstructing these measures. Again the statements the writings.
And if someone where to come here and refer to ‘that homosexual, Barney Frank’, they would sound as bigoted as Frank did when he single-out Scalia as ‘that homophobe, Scalia’.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Not really. Barney is a homosexual. If there was any REASON his sexual preference was relevant as Scalia’s homophobia is relevant here. I know at least I wouldnt consider it bigoted.
For you to suggest that most people wouldn’t find that bigoted, is partisan denial and wishful thinking.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Frank WASNT wrong. Scalia should appologize for spreading ignorance about homosexuality
March 24th, 2009 at 4:12 pmbackup Says:
Not the same thing. Franks sexual preference is in no way relevant TO that thread. Scalias homophobia IS relevant here
March 24th, 2009 at 4:15 pm75 posts on “teh gays” and “their agenda”, and no Parodyll?
Dare I say, how refreshing!
March 24th, 2009 at 4:16 pmmaybe so. How does that affect the other 4 that would be needed for a majority?
March 24th, 2009 at 4:33 pmyou have a point.
But, really, any time that someone debates Frank’s position on LGBT issues, it would be okay to refer to Frank as ‘that homosexual, Frank’ with the derogatory tone?
March 24th, 2009 at 4:36 pmScalia is wrong about homosexuality.
Frank’s namecalling is not appropriate or helpful.
March 24th, 2009 at 4:39 pmGood. Draw attention to it. This is great.
March 24th, 2009 at 4:43 pm*
backup Says:
maybe so. How does that affect the other 4 that would be needed for a majority?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
His statement about Scalia is what is being talked about. Frank isnt confident in the conservative makeup of the court but he didnt call them all homophobes he called Scalie a homophobe. The whole issue of gay rights isnt going away. The court changes its make-up regularly. That is a DIFFERENT ARGUMENT. The issue before you changed the argument here is Frank calling Scalia a homophobe and YOU saying he should appologize. No he shouldnt Scalia should. What happens over the long haul on this issue in the Supreme Court…well we will see.
March 24th, 2009 at 4:45 pmbackup Says:
Scalia is wrong about homosexuality.
Frank’s namecalling is not appropriate or helpful.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I disagree. I admit right now this is a subjective judgement. I think you CALL a spade a spade, a liar a liar, and someone acting like a homophobe a homophobe.
March 24th, 2009 at 4:47 pmSo just what is so wrong about a Supreme Court Justice repeatedly saying he has prejudiced views? Freedom of Speech.
Oh wait, it’s a judge. I guess rule of law and impartiality sort of got sh*tcanned along with the whole oath thing.
March 24th, 2009 at 6:16 pmEugeneDebs and Trittydi.
I thought about. What Frank did has draw attention to Scalia’s writings. For that reason, you’re right, I think what he did was helpful.
The only drawback might be that some independent’s may put off by what could pass for inflammatory name calling.
Whether it’s a net plus for Frank, Democrats or the LGBT cause, I don’t know.
March 24th, 2009 at 6:23 pmbackup Says:
Whether it’s a net plus for Frank, Democrats or the LGBT cause, I don’t know.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Well thats the thing. You NEVER know. You take a shot and do what you think is right, roll the dice then live with the consequences.
March 24th, 2009 at 6:45 pm.
Dear Backedup,
Take a laxative.
.
March 24th, 2009 at 7:20 pmMCMetal Says:
How the fu(k did morons like this ever get beyond having a Judge Judy type of show, much less be placed upon the SCOTUS?
Very simple, McMetal. Just remember who appointed him. [Hint: same moron who appointed Gonzo; same moron who appointed big business mavens to ru[i]n the EAP; same moron who assured us that Iraq had WMD. . . ]
March 25th, 2009 at 5:55 pmJustice Scalia’s opinions have been consistently anti-gay and he would most likely vote against Gay Marriage, if the issue ever came before him. Barney Frank is 100% correct in saying that he would like the issue of Gay Marriage to come before the Supreme Court when Scalia is no longer there, and when Conservatives do not hold a 5 to 4 majority, as they do today. With its current Conservative make-up, Gay Rights are not likely to obtain a very favorable hearing in today’s Supreme Court.
Please visit my Blog:
March 26th, 2009 at 12:35 am“Conservatives Are America’s Real Terrorists”
http://conservativesarecommunistss.blogspot.com/
F**K Bwany Frank…He is a FAT child moloster,who rapes little boys,and likes it up the A**!!! He should be in Prison…No wait,he would love that!!! FOX NEWS RULES… Dont ask me,ask the RATINGS…
March 27th, 2009 at 2:21 am