Follow breaking news @lgbtqnation

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s 7 worst anti-gay statements

By Miranda Blue| People for the American Way
Tuesday, December 11, 2012

On Friday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear two landmark cases on marriage equality. Yesterday, Justice Antonin Scalia reminded us again why gay rights advocates, to put it mildly, aren’t counting on his vote.

Scalia is the Supreme Court’s most outspoken opponent of gay rights. He led the dissent to the two major gay rights decisions of his tenure on the Court, the decisions to strike down Texas’ criminal sodomy law and to overturn Colorado’s ban on local anti-discrimination measures.

Antonin Scalia

And in his spare time, Scalia minces no words about his uncompromising opposition to gay rights. Here are seven of his most egregious anti-gay statements:

  • Compares bans on homosexuality to bans on murder: On Monday, Scalia asked a gay law student, “If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against other things?”
  •  …and to bans on polygamy and animal cruelty: In his dissent to the Colorado case, Romer v. Evans, Scalia wrote, “But I had thought that one could consider certain conduct reprehensible–murder, for example, or polygamy, or cruelty to animals–and could exhibit even ‘animus’ toward such conduct. Surely that is the only sort of ‘animus’ at issue here: moral disapproval of homosexual conduct, the same sort of moral disapproval that produced the centuries old criminal laws that we held constitutional in Bowers.”
  • Defends employment and housing discrimination: In his dissent to Lawrence, the decision that overturned Texas’ criminal sodomy law, Scalia went even further, justifying all kinds of discrimination against gays and lesbians: “Many Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their children’s schools, or as boarders in their home. They view this as protecting themselves and their families from a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive. The Court views it as ‘discrimination’ which it is the function of our judgments to deter.”
  • Says decision on “homosexual sodomy” was “easy” because it’s justified by long history of anti-gay discrimination: In a talk at the American Enterprise Institute earlier this year, Scalia dismissed decisions on abortion, the death penalty and “homosexual sodomy” as “easy”: “The death penalty? Give me a break. It’s easy. Abortion? Absolutely easy. Nobody ever thought the Constitution prevented restrictions on abortion,” he said. “Homosexual sodomy? Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state.”
  • Says domestic partners have no more rights than “long time roommates”:  In his dissent in Romer, Scalia dismissed the idea that a law banning benefits for same-sex domestic partners would be discriminatory, saying the law “would prevent the State or any municipality from making death benefit payments to the ‘life partner’ of a homosexual when it does not make such payments to the long time roommate of a nonhomosexual employee.”
  • Says gay rights are a concern of “the elite”: In his Romer dissent, Scalia lashes out at the majority that has upheld gay rights: “This Court has no business imposing upon all Americans the resolution favored by the elite class from which the Members of this institution are selected, pronouncing that ‘animosity’ toward homosexuality is evil. “
  • Accuses those who disagree with him of supporting the “homosexual agenda”: Lifting a talking point straight from the far right, Scalia accused the majority in Lawrence of being in the thrall of the “homosexual agenda”: “Today’s opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.”

© Right Wing Watch. An LGBTQ Nation media partner.

Archives: , , ,

Filed under: Newsmakers

38 more reader comments:

  1. the fact that he is still breathing is bad enough

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:14pm
  2. what a disgusting individual and a disgrace to the Supreme Court. is there a way to impeach him?

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:16pm
  3. He is whats wrong with this country.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:17pm
  4. Sad sad sad. We still have people out there that think they’re GOD…

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:19pm
  5. What a despicable excuse for a despicable”Human Being”!!!

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:19pm
  6. Wrong, Wrong and seriously wrong!

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:19pm
  7. So should Blacks still be slaves if the Constitution is dead? This guy has got to have a serious brain issue

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:21pm
  8. What do you want from a hateful bigot who should be retired from the bench.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:21pm
  9. He is a pompous monster who seems to believe he’s THE expert on constitutional law. He’s a bully too. He spoke to students of Baptist law school, Mississippi College School of Law @ First Baptist Church in downtown Jackson, MS, 3 winters ago. A student gave me a ticket to attend. I wore my clergy shirt. Within the first 15 minutes of the Justice’s talk, he had spoken negatively of LGBT citizens, Mexican’s, undocumented workers, and abortion rights multiple times! With Gov. Barbour sitting close by the stage as I was, I got up, gathered my coat, made a huff sound, and began my long walk to the exit doors…in protest! I was visibly shaken.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:26pm
  10. While I agree that most of these comments are truly awful, I also would like to point out that the ban on polygamy is also nonsensical. While I agree that his tone was reprehensible, I can think of good reasons to compare the bans on polygamy and gay marriage—both are legal proscriptions which dictate who we can love and who we can call family, and both are an affront to equal marriage rights.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:28pm
  11. he needs to be kicked out of the supreme court, he is a racist and a hater of MANY things.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:30pm
  12. Judge Douche

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:38pm
  13. he is a truly bad american if he doesn’t support freedom then he should leave america for these for us who truly what that freedom

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:43pm
  14. I look forward to the day we hear “dirty” news about why he holds such radical views.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:46pm
  15. He should be excused from this hearing

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:49pm
  16. yes I support thr homosexual agenda. I support their right to marry and not be discriminated against

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 6:56pm
  17. Ugly and vile beliefs he has. He definitely represents the extreme Right.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:02pm
  18. I can’t believe he is allowed to judge cases like this.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:02pm
  19. in that line of work you should be open minded. he should be fired.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:03pm
  20. … What’s-IN-his background/life that makes-HIM-such a HOMOPHOBE?!? Just-WONDRIN’!!!

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:11pm
  21. I can’t wait for this hater to retire so someone reasonable can be appointed. The civil rights of gay and leabians should not even be up for some court to rule whether we get to be treated equally and not like second class citizens!!!

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:11pm
  22. If anyone thinks that the Justices are bi-partisan, they are dreaming.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:12pm
  23. interesting

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:31pm
  24. So very sad

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:31pm
  25. y is he there y i ask you y

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:43pm
  26. Loser …he needs to retire …

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 7:52pm
  27. What he doesn’t understand is what is morally reprehensible to him is completely natural love to others. He makes his living discriminating against minorities. He is morally reprehensible.

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 8:50pm
  28. I disagree with him and that the Constitution is dead is also seriously wrong in my mind as I believe that the Constitution is still very much alive

    Posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 9:12pm
  29. I think most peoples morals are limited to physicality only. Love is an emotion not a gender.

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 12:02am
  30. What right do you have to play God????

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 10:10am
  31. Hope we win

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 12:40pm
  32. What a bigot! This. Bastard is an embarrassment to all true Americans.

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 12:45pm
  33. just goes to show that just because someone has the title, doesnt necessarily mean they deserve to be a supreme court judge…so much for keeping personal feelings out of decisions…let’s hope his “life time” job doesnt last forever…sigh

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 12:46pm
  34. How is he even a Supreme Court judge with this kind of stuff flying out of his mouth? Their entire job is to interpret the constitution, not apply their personal morals to the rest of us. It’s frustrating when politicians talk like this. It’s downright dangerous when it’s a judge.

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 12:52pm
  35. Once they’re in, they’re in. I mean I recall him being a frighteningly right wing choice when he was installed but I don’t recall him being near this forward with his bigotry.

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 1:01pm
  36. lil runt

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 1:07pm
  37. Supreme Closet Case.

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 1:32pm
  38. Isn’t he a Bush appointee? That would enplane so much.

    Posted on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 1:46pm