Followers

Scallywag


This should come as no shock whatsoever.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia recently told an audience at the University of California's Hastings College of Law that there is no Constitutional basis for women's rights (or gay rights) and that if we want there to be, it's the duty of the Congress to amend the Constitution to make it so.

In other words, in his view, the founding fathers only intended to enshrine the rights of rich, white heterosexual men in the Constitution and couldn't have imagined women or homosexuals would someday want the same rights.  As proof, he cites the necessity for the thirteenth amendment freeing Africans from American slavery, which, according to his logic, would not have been necessary if the founding fathers ever imagined that blacks would someday be considered free American citizens. So, you see, because they couldn't imagine free blacks, they also couldn't have imagined free women or free homosexuals.

And before you start pointing to the equal protection clause in the fourteenth amendment, Scalia is way ahead of you: He claims that the amendment only applies to blacks.

I guess it's just too fucking bad for all you non-male, non-hetero citizens out there.  Scalia knows all too well how difficult it is to get Congress to amend the Constitution.  In fact, that's what he's banking on because it ensures that certain segments of the society never receive the rights they're entitled to. Meanwhile, he can hide behind so-called "Constitutional originalism" to mask a bigoted perspective.

This is a clear indication of how Scalia will vote if and when Perry vs. Schwartzenegger makes it to his court before he retires or dies.

I hope y'all have a plan B.