In my previous entry about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Lawrence et al. v. Texas, I reported that Justice Scalia, author of the dissent, stated that he had “nothing against homosexuals,” as quoted by the AP this morning, which quote conjures up the stereotypical comment of the racist that “I have nothing against black people, some of my best friends are black; I just wouldn’t want my sister to marry one, etc.”.
Now that I’ve had a chance to read the full text of the opinion, concurrence and dissents, I find that what Justice Scalia actually said was that he has “nothing against homosexuals… promoting their agenda through normal democratic means,” which is very different from the impression left by the original AP quote taken out of context.
I still think that some bigotry against homosexuals clearly comes across in Justice Scalia’s words, the use of the phrase “homosexual agenda” several times not the least, but I don’t approve of selectively quoting a portion of a statement and using it in a way that its original author did not intend. So I apologize for compounding that error by using the AP quotation directly before reading the dissent for myself.
I was going to point out the AP’s misquote, but I’m glad you caught it too. I agree, the AP shouldn’t have done that. Not that it changes my opinion of Scalia very much, who never once used the word “gay” in his opinion. “Homosexual agenda” is such a loaded phrase these days, too. He’s such a dick.
I got the impression that Scalia was so upset he was barely coherent. I envision him red-faced, bug-eyed, spittle flying when he speaks.
Scalia says “in most states what the court calls ‘discrimination’ against against those who engage in homosexual acts is perfectly legal” (emphasis added by moi). It’s obvious he wants things be that way. Let’s hope he goes the way of the original dinosaurs sometime soon.
I agree with Raney…
Also, I take back what I said about “gay.” I’ve realized that Kennedy’s majority opinion didn’t use the word “gay” either.