Friday, June 27, 2003
Supreme Court Strikes Down Gay Sex Ban.
"The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda," [Justice Antonin] Scalia wrote for the three. He took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench.
"The court has taken sides in the culture war," Scalia said, adding that he has "nothing against homosexuals."
In complaining that the court had taken sides doesn't that suggest that Scalia believes that a court's job is to be partisan and prejudiced against certain sections of the community, in this case the queer community? Isn't it supposed to be equal justice for all?
"The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda," [Justice Antonin] Scalia wrote for the three. He took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench.
"The court has taken sides in the culture war," Scalia said, adding that he has "nothing against homosexuals."
In complaining that the court had taken sides doesn't that suggest that Scalia believes that a court's job is to be partisan and prejudiced against certain sections of the community, in this case the queer community? Isn't it supposed to be equal justice for all?
