Marriage case sets up clash of Supreme Court titans

  • Article by: DAVID G. SAVAGE , Tribune Washington Bureau
  • Updated: December 9, 2012 - 10:14 PM

Scalia and Kennedy have much in common but they have been on opposite sides of social issues.

  • 9
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 9 of 9
treddleDec. 9, 12 9:18 PM

Given that the catholic church publicly is opposed to equal rights and the civil liberties for gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual, and allied folks; it is obvious the catholics on the supreme court should recluse themselves from hearing any of these cases. There is an appearance they are prejudiced and cannot try these cases with impartiallity. That would remove six of the justices from these cases leaving the three jews to do the work of the nation. Of any of the branches of gov't, the supreme court must be a mirror of our society. Six catholics and three jews is not by any measure a mirror of our society.

8
10
sjhuotDec. 9, 12 9:20 PM

"If moral disapprobation of homosexual conduct is 'no legitimate state interest' ... what justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples?" Exactly! Thank you, Justice Scalia, for providing the logic to grant gays and lesbians full access to the state supplied benefits of marriage. Your "moral disapprobation" is dark ages thinking, along with women not being allowed to vote, prohibitions on interracial marriage, and employment discrimination against, well, you name it (single women, pregnant women, Irish, blacks, Latinos, gays, etc.).

15
3
normysamoronDec. 10, 1212:55 AM

@Treadle - your attempt to neatly compartmentalize the Justices of the Supreme Court by religious affiliation, and suggestion that they should recuse themselves is as divisive and backward as the prejudice you abhor. In case you didn't notice, most American Catholics, including myself, ignore the misguided appeals by the Catholic Bishops when it comes to 1950s view on science and sexual ethics and vote with our conscience. People are more nuanced and their feelings about ethical matters are usually complex. To suggest that the Jusices are controlled by their religious views is simply 2 dimensional and shallow.

7
2
dtmonkeyboyDec. 10, 12 1:29 AM

So basically Scallia admitted in 1996 that he will twist the constitution to match his personal views. Shameful.

10
1
comment229Dec. 10, 12 4:01 AM

I lost all respect for the supreme court when they got into the rulings about campaign spending. Look at the last election and the total waste of money in this country. Sometimes, I think we get what we deserve. I just think of the good this campaign money could have done in the USA. These people don't live in the same USA as I do.

12
2
mn2niceDec. 10, 12 6:21 AM

I can just hear what famed civil rights scholar Lawrence Tribe would say about Scalia's dark, dismal and archiac view of humanity and our rights as humans, to be free from discrimination on any grounds. Scalia has for over 20 years stated in his opinions that lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgendered individuals are a scorge on society. He has allowed, no, he has actively and aggressively entwined in his legal opinions his religious beliefs, which have no place in an opnion issued by the United States Supreme Court. He would probably defend our executions simply for being part of the LGBT community. His views and those of people like him bring shame to a country that has always seen our Constitution as a living, breathing, and evolving document that acts as a shield to protect the disadvantaged and downtrodden in our society. The same is true for state constitutions, which, like the U.S. Constitution, were written to define our rights and responsibilities as citizens. To give us freedom. The politicizing of the Supreme Court over the last 5o years has caused much harm to us as a society, and I hope one day it will return to truly being a fair and impartial judicial body. I respect Justice Kennedy and believe he has the will to do the right thing.

11
1
bizsmithDec. 10, 12 7:48 AM

As long as Scalia believes that homosexuality is a "behavior" rather than how a person is wired, you know how he will vote.

5
1
larrymickDec. 10, 12 7:51 AM

I find it ironic that the party of "personal responsiblity" is all about legislating our personal lives.

6
1
Brad57Dec. 10, 12 8:26 AM

This just proves not all conservatives think alike. In fact, it points out a huge difference between conservative Libertarians and religious conservatives. They both may agree on issues such as smaller government, fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, etc., but as this article points out, they disagree on moral issues. It is possible, for example, to have strong religious convictions without having the need to force those same religious convictions on others. Jesus told his disciples to teach people about God’s Kingdom. He did not tell them to form a political party and force everyone into that Kingdom.

5
0
  • 1 - 9 of 9

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT