[seanc623]

For the record I don't think the Boy Scouts amount to much when weighed against the numerous examples of GOP indifference to the Bill Of Rights. However as I said in a previous post or reply the Boy Scouts have the right to exclude whomever they please; if we had Libertarians on the Supreme Court they would not have been in the crosshairs like this in the first place. I can say that with confidence because Libertarians and others who obey the Constitution would not cite the flawed precedents their Republican and Democrat peers always do, nor would they legislate from the bench. Libertarian judges would be bound by their oath to point out the fallacies in previous precedents rather than use these precedents as guidance.

[lasereye]

if we had Libertarians on the Supreme Court they would not have been in the crosshairs like this in the first place.

The same could be said for conservative Republicans. Actually it was the Boy Scouts who brought the case to the Supreme Court. Originally the New Jersey courts ruled they had to accept gay scoutmasters. It was that court that put them in the crosshairs. They then appealed to the federal courts and they lost in those too until the Supreme Court.

The conservatives on the SC have been doing lots of good things like paring back the excesses of alot of laws like the Americans With Disabilities Act, which has had alot of bizarre consequences. I guess libertarians would rule the whole thing is unconstitutional but there's not likely to be a libertarian president in the foreseeable future. The Bush Justice Dept. has just advanced the argument in a major gun control decision that will come in July that the Second Amendment does not apply only to state militias but to individuals. It's the first time any administration has made that argument in a gun control case. I'll be interested in seeing how that comes out.