Discussion: Scalia Compares Legal Protections For Gay People To Protections For Pedophiles

Discussion for article #242921

1 Like

He argued that it instead should be up to the democratic process to determine which minority groups deserve legal protections.


So I guess he'd be OK if a majority of citizens voted to deny LGBT persons the right to vote?
25 Likes

Great analogy! Except for one involving a minor below the age of consent and the other…y’know…not.

Asshole.

20 Likes

wow, and this piece of ambulatory human excrement fancies himself The Ultimate Constitutional Scholar Who Possesses The Truth.

Under his formulation, Brown v Board of Education would never have happened. Nor Loving v Virginia.

The only SC justice worse than him is Clarence Thomas.

34 Likes

Our ISIL Justice…This fat filth needs to be drummed off the Court. He’s a disgrace as he feeds his brand of hateful political meat to his dogs for an election season he’s already helped into the deep slime.

13 Likes

The most troubling thing is he conflates Pedophilia with homosexuality. He is supposed to be an educated man. It’s quite embarrassing. No one is arguing that Pedophiles have equal protection. Scalia changed the debate topic. What about a heterosexual pedophile do they get equal protection?

23 Likes

You think a Catholic would be a lot more careful about tossing the word “pedophile” around so carelessly.

42 Likes

Nope, not a dime’s worth of difference between letting Hillary choose his successor in the sad, sad event his seat suddenly opens up and any of the Republicans. No reason for young people and minorities to even bother voting unless Bernie wins the nomination.

18 Likes

If a first year law student made those arguments he would be laughed at.

24 Likes

I’m sure Hillary will make that point early and often. Anything else would be criminally irresponsible.

2 Likes

Of course he would.

6 Likes

but he would’ve approved Plessy vs Ferguson… because… you know… 3/5 of a person doesn’t have rights and the majority approved property rights…

5 Likes

He argued that it instead should be up to the democratic process to determine which minority groups deserve legal protections.

And by democratic process he means super packs.

12 Likes

And by democratic process he means super packs

Fox viewers would do.

3 Likes

He’s intentionally using an inflammatory image and directing it at the low info Kim Davis crowd…‘Justice’ seems inappropriate before Scalia’s name.

13 Likes

Retire already.

4 Likes

And this is why this asshole has no business being on the highest Court in the land. Same was said in similar ways about black people at one time. We need a new law to impeach a sitting SCOTUS justice when their mind shows clear evidence of going to shit. The man is either a bigot, sick or entering a new stage of dementia…Perhaps all three. Inappropriate cruel jokes using his over-inflated ego and batshit-crazy reasoning, is a dead giveaway…and all at the expense of real people, who are already the target of such extreme hate crimes. This type of talk by Scalia only fans the flames of this type of bigotry.

Impeach this fucking bigot.

24 Likes

IT Should. WHY should UNELEcted OFFICIaLs LEGISlate My hate FROM the BENch? I want TO BE free FROM THE shackles OF LBGT Tyranny!!11!1!!~!one!1!!!

2 Likes

You know what’s even more mind-boggling to me than Scalia’s obvious but already well-known bigotry?

Log Cabin Republicans.

13 Likes

But… but…but… Hillary’s a war-monger and a subservient tool of Wall Street and hates the middle class and Black Lives Matter also too!

2 Likes