• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

SCOTUS: Scalia on the defensive over gay rights

Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

specklebang said:
I respectfully disagree. Seems to be used that way.

“If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against other things?"
Click to expand...

No, he's musing about the concept of morality, and how we can apply morality in our lives and laws. One person's moral opinion does not equal all.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Samhain said:
No, he's musing about the concept of morality, and how we can apply morality in our lives and laws. One person's moral opinion does not equal all.
Click to expand...

Then he shouldn't have used murder to compare with, since it is a category of conduct that not only can be morally odious, but actually harms other people. It isn't just a question of being biased against murderers.

Moral judgements about sexual orientation aren't like that.

So if he wanted to make an argument on the merits about using morality in the law (and such an argument can be made), then he should have compared anti-gay laws to Jim Crow or other outrageously discriminatory laws.

But of course that doesn't serve his conservative agenda.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Your Star said:
Anyone who can compare homosexuality to murder, or justifying using the state to judge, rate, and block business's from selling video games(Why is he not a statist for supporting that?) based on mid-1600 parenting techniques is a dumbass. Sorry, it's just the truth.
Click to expand...

See post #14. Typical biased reframe of what he said.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Equating homosexuality with evil or immorality is vile. I happen to be a huge advocate of morality but not the type of morality Scalia espouses. Sorry, I'll go with Head Of Joaquim on this one even though I rarely agree with him on other topics.:)

He's an intellectual thug who can make arguments based on thoughtful merits. Which is why he constantly makes invidious comparison like he just did between gays and murderers.

The comparison shows a dull intellect that can't make distinctions between moral judgments that have a basis in the rights of others, and moral judgments that merely involve prejudice and hate.

Murder harms the rights of others, so making moral judgments about murder is warranted, even putting aside the social policies we want concering dissuading violence. Sexual orientation isn't remotely like that. It's the same as Scalia saying: can't we make laws embodying racists moral judgment that black people are bad and need to be oppressed.
Click to expand...
Samhain said:
No, he's musing about the concept of morality, and how we can apply morality in our lives and laws. One person's moral opinion does not equal all.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

The subject is "moral feelings," not homosexuality, murder, or "other things."

He is saying that as one can have moral feelings about a number of things, murder being one, one can have moral feelings about homosexuality as well.

specklebang said:
I respectfully disagree. Seems to be used that way.

“If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against other things?"
Click to expand...
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

head of joaquin said:
No judicial temperament at all. A judge not only has to be unbiased he has to appear to be unbiased. That's very important for the public to have trust in the judiciary. Scalia is a scab on the high court.
Click to expand...

And the so-called liberal justices are any different how? Their bias is known.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

If you said this Peter, I would understand and respect you even if I didn't agree with you. But this is different. Scalia is a court member and has no business expressing this publicly considering he may be ruling on this case.




Peter Grimm said:
The subject is "moral feelings," not homosexuality, murder, or "other things."

He is saying that as one can have moral feelings about a number of things, murder being one, one can have moral feelings about homosexuality as well.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

It is a bad comparison but at least the guy is honest.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

I think he is trying to make an appeal to moral intuition. He is guessing that we know that it is right to have "moral feelings" about something like murder.

He is correct in that assumption - we all know that murder is wrong. The question is, do we have a right to make that judgement about murderers?

Intuitively, most people would say "yes."

What gives us that right?

This is Scalia's point, I believe, and it's an interesting one. I don't have the answer. Whatever gives us that right may or may not be transferrable to other questions, such as homosexuality.

falcata said:
It's pretty clear that he is refering to it negatively here, at least close if not on par wih murder.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

The thing that strikes me the most about this is that it is an uncharacteristically sloppy dodge of the real issue by Scalia. (My own view of the man is that he is very bright, but sometimes wrong on important issues.) The people can have moral feelings against anything and everything, but when those feelings are put into law, those laws must comport with the Constitution. The best argument against gay rights being constitutionalized is the simple strict constructionist/historical one. (I do not agree with it because I think it reads the history incorrectly, but at least the arguments can withstand logical analysis. ) When you start heading into silly territory like ignoring the fact that murder does harm to another individual, you start to reveal your irrational prejudices. (And in this area, Scalia actually is quite bigoted, so his remarks do not surprise me.)
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

A misleading thread title seeing as Scalia did not in fact compare homosexuality to murder, he simply mentioned the two in close context as an appeal to extremes (ala Santorum). It was however a surprisingly piss poor choice of words and delivery on his part, and will likely be ridiculed in the same manner. On a side note, those who have dismissed Scalia as a complete dummy, or any Supreme Court Justice for that matter, need a reality check.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

clownboy said:
And the so-called liberal justices are any different how? Their bias is known.
Click to expand...

Whoosh, right over your head!
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

TurtleDude said:
well Scalia is widely seen as one of the greatest intellects to ever sit on the court. we get the fact that you don't like his views on gays, lesbians etc. and while I disagree with him on his views towards gays he certainly is a better justice than anyone the dems have appointed in the last 40 years
Click to expand...

LOL So there you have it! Keep em comin Shecky!
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Peter Grimm said:
The subject is "moral feelings," not homosexuality, murder, or "other things."

He is saying that as one can have moral feelings about a number of things, murder being one, one can have moral feelings about homosexuality as well.
Click to expand...

No, he was arguing that it's OK to have moral feelings embodied in the law, arguing that since we do it with murder, why can't we do it with sexual orientation.

The reason is obvious to anybody with a thought in his head. "Moral feelings" should never be embodied into law if the sole purpose is bias and discrimination against a group of people who aren't harming any body. Murders, in contrast, harm people, so our moral feelings coincide with a positive case for protecting society and its members.

See the difference now? Basically, Scalia is saying, if people have moral feelings about black folk being inferior, then it's OK to pass laws that discriminate againt them.

That's how intellectuall bankrupt the man is.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Your Star said:
This asshole is a plague on the court, he should have never been appointed.

SCOTUS: Scalia on the defensive over gay rights - First Read
Click to expand...

While I disagree with some people in this thread who have suggested that Scalia is somehow stupid (he really isn't), and while he clearly didn't literally compare homosexuality to murder, he did discuss the two things with some sort of implied moral equivalency. This is ****ing stupid. Think whatever you like about homosexuality (e.g. immoral because god says so, or whatever); but the notion that legislative activity related to moral stances about homosexuality (which is to say, intentional acts between consenting adults) and legislative acts related to moral stances regarding the crime of murder (i.e. a unilateral act of permanent violence against an unwilling victim) bear any real relationship to one another is thoroughly ridiculous.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Peter Grimm said:
I think he is trying to make an appeal to moral intuition. He is guessing that we know that it is right to have "moral feelings" about something like murder.

He is correct in that assumption - we all know that murder is wrong. The question is, do we have a right to make that judgement about murderers?

Intuitively, most people would say "yes."

What gives us that right?

This is Scalia's point, I believe, and it's an interesting one. I don't have the answer. Whatever gives us that right may or may not be transferrable to other questions, such as homosexuality.
Click to expand...

While yes he i refering here to choices we make with our morals, he is also comparing what he believes is the immoraity of homosexuality to the immorality of murder.

He is making the assumption here that loving someone of the same gender is of a similar nature to taking the life of another human being. To me that is a reprehensible thought. I myself have many family members who are homosexual and are among the best people I have had the opportunity to know.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Well, it is a reality to say that a Bible believing Christian or Jew, would condemn homosexuality. Would they also condemn murder? I think so.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

hfd said:
Well, it is a reality to say that a Bible believing Christian or Jew, would condemn homosexuality. Would they also condemn murder? I think so.
Click to expand...

And racists will condemn blacks and call that a moral feeling.


Point is we don't embody moral feelings into law if they are merely prejudicial and hate-filled. There has to be a social purpose of protecting society and its members.

Murder is both morally odious AND it harms others. So we have laws against murder. It isn't based on a desire to discriminate against murderers.

Not so with the "moral feelings" of the religious right or racists against gay or minorities. They just want to discriminate. There is no logic to allowing them to do so in our jurisprudence and it ISN'T like murder.

See the problem with the bloviating Scalia's "argument"?
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Of course you have the right to a moral opinion against murder, it harms others.

Homosexuality doesn't. Is he really trying to say that I have a right to feel that eating cheese is immoral and I can legislate against it? With that standard you could apply morality to anything and everything to any end.

The conduct of homosexuals only harms Scalia's insecurites at the most, the actions of consenting adults in the bedroom is none of his business, much less something he has the right to be morally offended by.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

I'm more disturbed by his apparent belief that logical fallacies form the foundations of legitimate legal opinions. Talk about houses built on sand.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Personally, I think the scum of the court are the justices that won't stand up for human rights by banning elective abortions that so clearly violate a human's most sacred right, the right to life.

I also agree with Scalia. Why can't people have feelings against homosexuality or also believe that it is immoral just like they believe murder is immoral?
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

Your Star said:
This asshole is a plague on the court, he should have never been appointed.



SCOTUS: Scalia on the defensive over gay rights - First Read
Click to expand...

I don't think he's really comparing the act of homosexuality with the act of murder. He's comparing the ability to have moral feelings on the two. And in my opinion he is correct that we can have moral feelings on both of them.

That said, if he is using this argument to come to the conclusion that we can have laws barring homosexuality because we have laws barring murder I disagree with his conclusion. Laws against murder provide social order, while laws against homosexuality really don't. We don't legislate against everything we find immoral. I don't know if that's what he was saying though because the source was short and unclear.
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

I wish you would refrain from the insults, they aren't really needed, but you make some great points.

First, should these "moral feelings" be embodied in to law? Dunno. Good question.

Second, you distinguish murderers as a group that can be discriminated against because they hurt people. This is interesting. I would say, though, that we have laws against many things that don't hurt others. It would be illegal for me to smear myself in green jello and walk naked through the subway, for example.

head of joaquin said:
No, he was arguing that it's OK to have moral feelings embodied in the law, arguing that since we do it with murder, why can't we do it with sexual orientation.

The reason is obvious to anybody with a thought in his head. "Moral feelings" should never be embodied into law if the sole purpose is bias and discrimination against a group of people who aren't harming any body. Murders, in contrast, harm people, so our moral feelings coincide with a positive case for protecting society and its members.

See the difference now? Basically, Scalia is saying, if people have moral feelings about black folk being inferior, then it's OK to pass laws that discriminate againt them.

That's how intellectuall bankrupt the man is.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

head of joaquin said:
And racists will condemn blacks and call that a moral feeling.


Point is we don't embody moral feelings into law if they are merely prejudicial and hate-filled.
Click to expand...

Not sure that relates to Biblical admonishments. See the problem with your response?
 
Re: Justice Scalia compares homosexuality to murder.

He isn't doing that, though. He never says that homosexuality is similar to murder.

falcata said:
While yes he i refering here to choices we make with our morals, he is also comparing what he believes is the immoraity of homosexuality to the immorality of murder.

He is making the assumption here that loving someone of the same gender is of a similar nature to taking the life of another human being. To me that is a reprehensible thought. I myself have many family members who are homosexual and are among the best people I have had the opportunity to know.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom