Alito backed privacy, gay rights-(young Alito issued rousing defense of privacy and gay rights)

ap on San Diego Union Tribune ^ | 11/02/05 | Calvin Woodward - ap

[concerned about politics]

You mean believed 35 years ago (when he was in college). We have no idea what he now believes.

That's why we have to take our time. These things were once in his heart. We have to make sure he's grown and matured into a man, otherwise, we're damned for a lifetime.

[clee1]

True.

FWIW, Mother Theresa was too liberal for my tastes.

[commonasdirt]

"We're all young and foolish once and survive it if we're lucky. "

Reminds me of the old Phil Ochs song:

Sure once I was young and impulsive
I wore every concievable pin
Even went to socialist meetings
Learned all the old union hymns
But now I'm older and wiser
And that's why I'm turning you in
Love me, love me, love me....I'm a liberal

[sinkspur]

FWIW, Mother Theresa was too liberal for my tastes.

And then there's Jesus, who cheesed off the Pharisees, taking all those "liberal" positions in favor of prostitutes, and lepers, and sinners who were hated by the establishment of His day.

Seems to me Alito has things in just the right perspective.

[NormsRevenge]

Thanks for the begrudged bump.

Sorry you are so easily offended.

[clee1]

I agree. Alito is just fine with me.

[AntiGuv]

Here's some more info on the strip search case. Definitely worth reading before jumping to conclusions.

[SoCalPol]

You forgot to include Saul who chucked rocks at
christians until he became St. Paul.

[concerned about politics]

And then there's Jesus, who cheesed off the Pharisees,taking all those "liberal" positions in favor of prostitutes, and lepers, and sinners who were hated by the establishment of His day.

Jesus didn't like the government tax collectors and the priest who supported their high taxes. They stold the money from the people who actually earned it. He was a faith based intuitive supporter.
He healed the whores, AIDs riddled homos, the fake beggars, etc., of their liberalism and drove out their demons. He then told them to go and sin no more. You see, he came not for the saved, but specifically for those liberal sinners. He taught them, they became conservatives, and were saved.

[RHINO369]

concerned about politics wrote: If this guy believes the Constitution says the courts have the right to force us to "tolerate" a disgusting, dysfunctional sex fetish simply because they say so, he's out of the running in my book. No normal person should be forced to tolerate this diseased infested behavior, no matter what. We live in a free country, and if I choose not to "tolerate" these perverts, that's my choice - period - and no homosexual activist judge will ever force me to think differently. This had better be investigated fast, before this nomination goes any further. I'll e-mail the religious right to notify them of this discovery, so they can check it out. There's always a chance the press is just trying to stop his nomination through fraudulent reports, but let's make sure we know if he really supported the queer minority before we even get close to giving this guy a pass.

You have the right not to tolerate them? huh? Listen if you want the freedoms you enjoy you can't take away other. I think gay's are disgusting, and I don't wanna see it, hear about it, or think about it. But does that mean our government should tell people what to do? Hell no, this Alito sounds smart, government is a necessary evil not your person moral patrol. If you take away gays, cheaters, those who sleep around before marriage, guys who like to beat off, guess what, nobody will be left to notice when they take you away. I don't think gays should be married, or even be protected by civil rights laws, but don't be so quick to give away rights.

[NormsRevenge]

Laura Bush was a Democrat before she m. George.
Lets dump her and get a first lady who was born
a Republican.
With your thread, and some of the others I see you put up,
you need to get a life
-----
You forgot to include Saul who chucked rocks at
christians until he became St. Paul.


-----

Your first reply would imply I somehow seek to derail the
Alito nomination and try to make a personal statement about the poster that seeks to imply I am less than above board in general here at FR...

Your second reply makes little sense at all and is almost as silly as the comment re: Mrs. Bush.

I can hardly wait for the 3rd one. I'll see if I can get a life while I await it.

---

[SoulSearching]

According to the csmonitor article --- in 1997 Alito ruled that the Constitution does NOT afford protection to the unborn!!! 35 years ago??? Not hardly.

I hope and pray that Miers was NOT ousted for O'Connor in a suit.

If so, I know some conservatives/Christians who need to figure out what Biblical discerning means. After all the gloating (over Miers) even a little intuition would help!!!

The price, 40 million deaths and climbing. With 85% of Americans claiming to be Christians there are no excuses!!! Even though the common one is --- I don't vote my conscience and that's a deadly shame!!!

[AntiGuv]

I missed the AIDS riddled homos when I read my bible. What translation do you have?

[KDD]

His views on the Commerce Clause are excellent, so that sounds more than good enough for me. But if his views on federalism, free speech, privacy rights, and criminal justice are as they've been portrayed by his rulings and writings, then he may very well be perfect.

I am in complete support of Alito from everything I've seen thus far.

Same here.

Abortion and who's doin who is not at the top of every conservatives critical concerns list. When the American people's hearts are changed on abortion we will not need the Court. A Constitutional Amendment declaring that life is protected from moment of conception instead of just after birth will be able to pass.

Judge Roberts has said he has found that elusive right to privacy in the Constitution...don't look to him to help overturn Roe, and as the the recent commerce clause case in Ashcroft v. Raich showed, when it comes to past unconstitutional rulings being overturned Judge Scalia is more likely to come down on the side of stare decisis in his ruling then he is to correct past bad rulings.. I suspect Alito falls somewhere in between the two positions.

Also the vast majority of Americans do not want a religious ideologue on the bench. They want restrictions on abortion but they do not want to make it illegal. And who knows when science will develop an alternative to abortion that will make the argument moot.

[ALWAYSWELDING]

"Jesus didn't like the government tax collectors and the priest who supported their high taxes. They stole the money from the people who actually earned it."

Jesus never actually referred to the high taxes. You can find justification for no more than 10% in other parts of scripture though.

Specifically, Jesus didn't like tax collectors because they were told to collect a certain amount for the state, but the state knew well the collectors always shook down the citizens for MORE than the state requested. The collector kept the rest.

This was the reason behind the tax collector giving back 3 times the amount he stole after he believed on Christ. He was eluding to God's law to pay back plus 3 times. Then Jesus said "today salvation has come to your house".

[SoCalPol]

I will make it simple for you.
People change. What they were at one age may not
hold true now.

[AntiGuv]

To be sure, I'd bet Alito would vote to strike down Roe v Wade. I totally support a right to privacy but it's not private when someone else is involved, even if that someone else hasn't been born yet..

[NormsRevenge]

That is quite true.

[AntiGuv]

But really, I could just about care less how he votes on anything else so long as he has a very narrow view of the Commerce Clause, which is an exceptional quality in a judge.

[KDD]

A good attorney might make ground in this Court if the definition of viability of the fetus can be argued. Medical science can save babies at much earlier stages of development then they could 33 years ago. This point alone should be grounds enough for a rehearing of the case "in light of new evidence" that the fetus can now survive without the mother at a stage of life outside the perimeters of the RoevWade Ruling. At the least, a new standard should exist...one that will keep up with medicines ability to progress in this area. That would effectively overturn it.