Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mother Jones)   Out of all stupid things Antonin Scalia has said or written about homosexuality and equal rights for gay Americans, here are absolutely the 7 worst   ( divider line
    More: Asinine, Scalia, Americans, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, sexual intimacy, adulterers, life partner, LGBT rights, Defense of Marriage Act  
•       •       •

8687 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Mar 2013 at 11:05 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

208 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

2013-03-26 09:18:07 PM  

TerminalEchoes: [ image 600x402]

I guess the GED in Law is presupposed.
2013-03-26 09:19:21 PM  

johnnyrocket: Listening to the banter on the Prop 8 case today, it's clearer than ever that justices do not decide cases on law or president, or rules or good judgement, they decide cases on pure prejudice, ideology, and well, complete BS.

Especially at the SCOTUS level, since they know no one can overrule them.

Given Kennedy's apparent position, that's good news in this case.
2013-03-26 09:21:51 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Slutter McGee: Funny how Scalia a few hours ago saved you liberals the right to not have your houses sniffed by drug dogs.

Wow. He saved just liberals from getting their houses searched? I don't think that's very constitutional.

Of course he saved just liberals from getting their houses searched, they are the ones without guns. You go near a republicans house for anything and you are likely to get shot to death.

//Troll On
2013-03-26 09:29:30 PM  

Last Man on Earth: austerity101: Car_Ramrod: Once again, at it's very base concept, if men are allowed to marry women, but women aren't allowed to marry women, that's blatant gender discrimination.

So are gender-specific bathrooms, though.  Why aren't those considered separate but equal?

Not sure if trolling, but what the hell, I'll bite.  A distinction being constitutionally protected, like race or gender, doesn't mean that the state can't make any distinction at all, it just means that the rule has to survive a certain level of scrutiny.  Gender discrimination has "heightened scrutiny," which means that the state has to prove what's termed a "substantial government interest" in order to make the law acceptable.  Consider height and weight requirements to work as a firefighter:  Yes, the requirements have a discriminatory effect, since far more women won't meet those requirements than men.  However, there are definite job requirements involved with firefighting that justify the prerequisite, and thus the discriminatory effect.

Different bathrooms for different genders meet that "substantial interest" heading, due to issues of privacy, harassment risks, etc.  For that matter, you very likely won't be charged with a crime of any sort for taking a piss in the wrong bathroom, just for any untoward conduct you perform while in there, so someone is unlikely to have any standing to challenge bathrooms.  Before you ask, no you can't mandate that gay men use the women's room or lesbians the men's room, because having a sexuality check before using the bathroom would represent a fairly massive privacy intrusion.

I wasn't trolling--I was trying to show how we do allow certain kinds of discrimination to happen, arguing that not doing it would be worse somehow.  (Whether those arguments are sound or not is open for debate.)  Something being discriminatory isn't reason enough to disallow it, which is why we can't just say "Gay marriage should be legal because not to do so is discrimination on the basis of sex/gender."

However, I'm pretty sure that people get charged with crimes for using the wrong restroom--men in women's restrooms and trans people in general.

But I digress.

/for gay marriage and against gender-specific bathrooms, for the same reasons
2013-03-27 12:23:17 AM  
He's not stupid.

He's an asshole, and a smart one. He uses his brain quite adeptly in order to maximize the number of people he can be an asshole towards. He does this because he enjoys it, and he enjoys it because he's a giant asshole. Calling Scalia stupid is way too charitable, and also inaccurate.
.find_in_page{background-color:#ffff00 !important;padding:0px;margin:0px;overflow:visible !important;}.findysel{background-color:#ff9632 !important;padding:0px;margin:0px;overflow:visible !important;}
2013-03-27 12:25:18 AM  
...and should've previewed, as apparently Fark decided to insert random garbage into my comment.
2013-03-27 07:53:53 AM  
Well, Scalia is now past the halfway point for his demographic.  That means half of his white male friends are likely dead.  It also means if we didn't know he was alive and were given his birthday, we'd probably guess he was dead based on statistics.
2013-03-27 08:16:41 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Wooly Bully: skilbride: I'm just going to butt in here and say that majority of what you people hear about Scalia is fear mongering from the left

There's no way you could know that.

Every single lawyer I've talked to has made withering criticisms of Scalia. And these people are not "leftists".

Most of the ones I know think Scalia is brilliant but wrong. He is a genius at interpreting the law to mean exactly what he wants it to mean, which takes a good deal of intelligence and a very keen knowledge of the Constitution and related documents. My Con Law professor used one of his dissents to show us how Scalia makes up his mind about a case first and then works backward to find the citations he needs to buttress his opinions.

If Scalia wasn't so mean-minded, he could easily be the conservative and originalist version of Erwin Chemerinsky and be quite respected in his field, I think. Too bad he's such a jerk.

Yeah that's pretty much what my lawyer friends said: he's a fundamentally dishonest asshole who uses his considerable skills to push agendas based on his religious and political prejudices, while loudly proclaiming that he's really against that sort of thing. None of them accused him of being stupid, though. Just a horrible person and Supreme Court justice.
Displayed 8 of 208 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.