"It's a form of argument that I thought you would have known, which is called the `reduction to the absurd,'" Scalia told Hosie of San Francisco during the question-and-answer period. "If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against other things?"

Scalia said he is not equating sodomy with murder but drawing a parallel between the bans on both.
.........................................................................................................................................

Don't worry laffy, the police don't care that you're getting cornholed regularly. Enjoy your Obama reach around.

It's your open secret.

-- Modified on 12/11/2012 9:22:07 AM

I don't think being gay is immoral...

Can you think of any reason being gay is practical, or serves to benefit mankind?

Simpletons. This is apples and oranges. Homosexuality doesn't destroy anything against its will.

made in Q&As prove "ignorant, hateful bigotry"?

When made by white male conservatives of course.

Nothing ignorant,  bigoted, and hateful there eh?
ZING!

BTW, do yet to be born humans not care about living?

When does science prove "the will" starts?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Demographically speaking most exclusionary bias of any sort lies within the realm of conservative ideologies so yer "zing" don't apply. ZILCH!

It is not a matter of chicken or the egg first. Ignorance, due to lack of will to explore change, lies with the conservative mindset. Cold hard fact, history speaks to it. Conservatives are afraid to evolve, hence the definition.

As for the unborn, if yoo're going to mandate that they have to be brought into the world than it's your moral imperative to ensure they are cared for; pretty communist, eh?

Science is a long way off from proving when the will starts; but science has zeroed in most certainly on what brain structures, and their bioelectric functions are which indicate conciousness.

An ovum,  zygote, even an embryo to a point, has not yet developed the physiological structures which support higher cognitive processes therefore it's a safe bet to say that "The Will," ain't there yet.

I'm not pro-abortion, but I'm pro-common sense. Bringing unwanted children into the world is a far greater injustice than a considered early term abortion.  

Supremes, all of them, should keep their collective mouth shut. How Scalia isn't thrown off the bench for expressing opinions right before they're due to be presented to the court is beyond me. What a breach of faith with the nation and a conflict of interest.

When the Framers created our judicial system they meant it to be fair and impartial. Remember how they wanted the US Supreme Court to be above it all, to be outside of political parties and considerations? Remember when the Justice were so good at this that hardly anyone knew who they were? Remember how the Justices shunned the spotlight and weren't on conservative radio and television? Remember how we only ever knew them through their written opinions on case after they had heard those cases? Remember when the Justices never expressed an opinion beforehand?

Remeber that? Good times.

Change, for the sake of change, is the mindset of a cancer cell.

You talk out of your ass thru your own bigoted lense in regards to conservatism. Your written words, versus a dictionary prove it.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conservative

Nothing here about "fear of change" or "lack of will" to change. You're just talking out your ass and acting as if it's fact.

""As for the unborn, if yoo're going to mandate that they have to be brought into the world than it's your moral imperative to ensure they are cared for; pretty communist, eh?""

Pretty stupid really. I'm not the one bringing the child into the world. I have no obligation whatsoever to support it. Fucking lazy libs NEVER want to face real world consequences. What I was mearly saying was that the difference Zingbot was drawing between being gay and murder was that murder involves harming someone AGAINST THEIR WILL.

So if that person's will is determanitive in his example I drew the perfectly good anaology to the unborn child. Zing says people have 'a will". So if The Lord Science does'nt know when "the will" begins, how can you say you are not committing murder aborting a child. BTW, has science ever documented a human fetus coming to term and becoming anything other than a human being?

Yeah, SCOTUS used to rule on the Constitution. Now they rule on what they think it should be.

That's liberal thought, John Lennon shit ya know....

ZING!

As if I referred to an online dictionary. Go read/study some medical/psychological papers on the conservative mindset, you stupid ass.

Change for the sake of change? Nice try; another ridiculous strawman; you get high on your own gas like Jabba The Justice Scalia. Change, and risk, is necessary for progress. It's natural as well.

That was the point, skullfuck!!!!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Zygotes don't have "free will" assholicus.

I answered the question, you on the other hand ain't grokking the qualifiers.

Stop being a dumbfukk.

I said, they, meaning GAWD SCIENCE, don't know when self awareness starts.

BUT, now listen closely, they CAN determine when it ISN'T there!!!

Get it?

Run along now.