Kimba Wood
huh huh.. Wood
Posted on 09/30/2004 11:09:17 PM PDT by Texaggie79
He is the conservative bastion of the US supreme court, a favourite of President Bush, and a hunting partner of the vice-president. He has argued vociferously against abortion rights, and in favour of anti-sodomy laws. But it turns out that there is another side to Justice Antonin Scalia: he thinks Americans ought to be having more orgies. Challenged about his views on sexual morality, Justice Scalia surprised his audience at Harvard University, telling them: "I even take the position that sexual orgies eliminate social tensions and ought to be encouraged." It seems unlikely that this is what President Bush meant when he promised to appoint more judges like Scalia to the court, should the opportunity arise. Crucially, Justice Scalia is one of the judges in favour of overturning Roe v Wade, the landmark judgment protecting abortion as a constitutional right. One audience member also asked the judge "whether you have any gay friends, and, if not, whether you'd like to be my friend," the Harvard Crimson newspaper reported. "I probably do have some gay friends, but I have never pressed the point," Justice Scalia responded. He offered no clue to the logic behind his claim that orgies eliminate social tensions. Nobody asked him whether he was familiar with Rick Moody's novel The Ice Storm, turned into a movie by Ang Lee, which appeared to suggest the exact opposite.
What the hell?
What the hell is this???
This is obviously a sarcastic joke.
ok everyone remain calm. I think the US judicial system has just gone piano-plinking mad.
I live on sarcasm and this doesn't strike me. It seems off the wall enough, but it just doesn't fit.
ROTFLMAO!
Sounds like the old boy has a sense of humor!
But Scalia said his personal views on social issues have no bearing on his courtroom decisions.
“I even take the position that sexual orgies eliminate social tensions and ought to be encouraged,” Scalia said.
“But it is blindingly clear that judges have no greater capacity than the rest of us to decide what is moral.”
The Guardian quotes the Harvard Crimson. I just checked the Harvard Crimson website. Nowhere is this article mentioned. The last article that came up with a search under 'Scalia' was in March. A search under 'Scalia, orgies' came up negative also.
"scalia orgies". Now that brings up the disturbing thought of scalia in an orgy.
*shudder*
rather strange.
but whatever floats your boat, between consenting adults... is the law here. I guess for scalia, that includes orgies and all.
As long as he sticks with the constitution, we got a winner. Government ain't church of late. And biblical law is NOT our law of the land...
I guess it all comes down to how you define 'orgy'
I want to see Scalia with O'Connor and Bader-Ginsberg. Wow. That would be hot.
I watched one of these sessions at Harvard a couple years ago on C-SPAN, and it seemed like the students were WAY out in left field. Not (just) politically, but just out of touch with reality in general. Obviously very bright though. I can guess that there is some lead in that we are missing.
I'm having a hard time coming up with one though. Anywhere we can look at a complete transcript?
-paridel
Not much of a chance at a transcript. Scalia keeps those things tightly scripted. Would be interesting though.
baw chicka bow bow
Ginsberg's hot.
"But Scalia said his personal views on social issues have no bearing on his courtroom decisions."
Sounds like he was trying to make a point that despite what he may personally think, he stillhas to follow the constitution and not his personal wishes.
I'd like to see an actual transcript of the speech, though.
Well, to judge on whether it was a jest or not - one would need to see it in its context, and not pulled out of it. Standing separately, the remark does indeed lead to raised brows.
Does anyonse else think that these remarks by Scalia seem out of character? I was always under the impression that he worked hard to protect his image. Why would he be so flippant as to mock a police dispatch?
The context was this: Scalia was mocking some state court decision which voided a law banning group gay sex on the ground that the ban violated a right to privacy. Sclaia joked, How many people have to be involved in group gay sex for it no longer to be a matter of privacy? Later, in response to a question he joked, hey, I'm in favor of orgies for the purpose of reducing social tensions.
Okay, makes more sense.
I'm up late =)
Correction: It was some Europian decision Scalia was mocking. Here is the exchange:
_________________
Earlier in the evening, Scalia ridiculed the European Court of Human Rights’ 2000 decision striking down British legislation that bars group gay sex on the grounds that the law intruded upon private life.
He asked—rhetorically—how many individuals would have to be involved in a sex act for it to no longer qualify as “private.”
“Presumably it is some number between five and the number of people required to fill the Coliseum,” Scalia joked.
An audience member later rose to ask Scalia “whether you have any gay friends, and—if not—whether you’d like to be my friend.”
“I probably do have some gay friends,” Scalia said. “I’ve never pressed the point.”
But Scalia said his personal views on social issues have no bearing on his courtroom decisions.
“I even take the position that sexual orgies eliminate social tensions and ought to be encouraged,” Scalia said.
“But it is blindingly clear that judges have no greater capacity than the rest of us to decide what is moral.”
There's an antecedent to the reference to 'releasing social tensions', used ironically by Scalia, akin to 'opiate of the peoples', and which Harvard folks should 'get.' Wait for this to develop, although I doubt Scalia will bother to explain, unless in prep for CJSC hearings.
...with 72 virgins.
Scalia is a lightning rod whenever he opens his mouth in a public setting. I will reserve my judgment (pun not intended) on this statement until the MSM jackals demand an explanation, and he either expounds on what he said or guffaws that there are some who actually took it seriously.
Dude, WTF?!
Agggh! My eyes!
Why don't you just throw in Helen Thomas while you're at it?
No wonder I'm so stressed out!
They only wish it was true.
bttt
Hey Justice Scalia, you seem cool, but ...uhh... too much info. Ok, man?
I love Scalia's sense of humor. He can be, and is, very sarcasic from the bench. He can destroy an argument with his sarcasm.
I would love to see the whole exchange on tape. Obviously, liberals hate him & are going to twist it out of context.
IMO, everyone needs to relax…Scalia is okay. And I'm sure this "tempest in a teapot" is not going to bother him.
It sounds like a Hasty Pudding event. You know, they invite someone once a year to be their grand marshall at this Harvard social club and the guest is expected to be utterly outrageous.
I don't believe that this conservative judge and father of eight meant this as anything but sarcasm
I suppose all doubt is removed about what goes on in chambers.
Well, they took this quote completely out of context... It was in reference to a ruling by (I believe) a British court, having to do with public sexual acts. I think that Judge Scalia was making a joke...
Mark
It's from the Guardian.
Read it with a skeptical eye - me thinks this was taken out of much larger context, and perhaps a sarcastic response.
Kimba Wood
huh huh.. Wood
Finally an excuse...and my wifes a blonde....this is great.
I think your right....He mockingly said it.
LOL
I think it's absolutely hilarious!!!!!!!!!
A real hottie!
Let me pick the group and I'm in!
Wooohoooo! Are you in?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.