RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceOn the heels of the announcement that the Supreme Court will hear two cases regarding gay marriage, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia defended some of his more controversial decisions concerning gay rights in a lecture Monday afternoon.
Scalia came to campus ...
(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
You go, Duncan Hosie '16, for standing up to this bigot.
DUNCAN IS MY HERO.
Unbelievable props to him
Reading about this question has made me never prouder to be a Princetonian.
Thank you, Duncan, for having so much courage and bravery.
Congratulations to Duncan for standing up to a figure of power who represents a great deal of what is wrong in our society, in a powerful and meaningful way.
Justice Scalia may have been rude and condescending in his response, but don't let it get you down. You have so much to be proud of. And you can count me among those who are in awe of your bravery.
Thanks Duncan for standing up for what's right. There's a reason Scalia didn't get into Princeton.
damn duncan, that was impressive.
Go Duncan!
Dear gays of Princeton,
Duncan is mine. I'm going to date him.
Signed, a senior
Yeehaw Duncan! We're all so proud of you. Keep making waves and standing up for what's right.
From a purely legal standpoint, all Scalia did was justify his dissent from the ruling in Romer v. Evans using a valid application of constitutional law. Whether or not you agree with Scalia, his logic was sound. Furthermore, to those of you who would call Scalia a bigot, please read what he actually wrote in the dissent.
"I would not myself indulge in such official praise for heterosexual monogamy, because I think it no business of the courts (as opposed to the political branches) to take sides in this culture war."
Scalia simply calls for the courts to stay out of the debate. He does not take a personal stance for or against gay rights.
While I am an admirer of Scalia's originalism approach, I wholeheartedly support gay rights. I must say however, that Scalia won this argument. Duncan's question, while undeniably brave and admirable, consisted merely of a passage written by Scalia followed by an expression of his contempt. In no way did Duncan attempt to offer any legal reasons why Scalia was wrong. On the other hand, Scalia explained his rhetorical tactics in addition to providing a legal justification thereof. I will take Scalia's side on this issue and say that the Supreme Court was incorrect in its judgement that Colorado's amendment was in violation of the Equal Protection clause. Perhaps it violates Ninth Amendment and is therefore illegal, but that is an entirely different argument.
To conclude, while I admire Duncan's bravery and agree that gay rights are constitutionally protected, I believe Scalia's dissent in Romer v. Evans was correct and that he was neither condescending nor bigoted in justifying his position.