So he’s not allowed to have a personal opinion or personal faith now? If so, that would probably violate both the free speech and establishment clauses of the first amendment.
Scalia is simply responding to an interview in his capacity as a private individual. His faith would only be a problem if his judicial decisions were motivated by his religion, which is not being suggested here.
Why? I didn’t claim there was one.
I think we all agree on that.
Yo might try Googling [Scalia “urban legends”] for starters
In Boumediene, Justice Scalia had to resort to a minority report from
a Senate committee, along with some stray news clippings, for the
conclusion that 30 released detainees have “returned” to the
battlefield. He did not pause to ask whether the figure of 30
returnees to the battlefield had any truth in it. (It doesn’t: Seton
Hall professor Mark Denbeaux, in showing this, has called out Scalia
for relying on, in effect, “urban legends.”
Well, I’m not sure that his factual mistake in his Boumediene dissent is what springs to mind when I think of “wingnut urban legends and fairy tales.” And this is pretty much the only result that comes up when I perform your recommended Google search. He might have been wrong, but the source for this wingnut urban legend/fairy tale appears to have been a Senate Minority Report based on DoD (mis-)information. While the information was clearly incorrect, I suspect that all sitting justices have cited to incorrect information at one time or another. I’m not sure that this means that these automatically qualify as urban legends or fairy tales.
Scalia should keep his personal religious beliefs to himself in the name of maintaining un-biased court decisions he will have to decide on while he sits on the bench. Imagine the uproar if ever a Muslim appointed to the Supreme Court dared to speak publicly about his/her religious beliefs regarding demons, etc. Nope. Scalia crossed a line a wiser person wouldn’t even have gone near.
I don’t agree. A supreme court judge should not speak publicly of his/her personal beliefs it can only point to how they make their decisions. If their religion comes first, the Constitution comes second and that’s against the oath they take on their freaking Bible.
And politicians should never make reference to prayer, god, or the blessing of America. Or, for that mater, take their oath upon a Bilble (and there have been politicians who have taken their oath upon the Koran, too).
Perhaps Scalia is making the assumption that wiser readers will realize that many justices have private religious sentiments, and that they are able to keep their professional judgment separate from their religious beliefs. Perhaps he believes that intelligent readers will understand he takes his oath to uphold the constitution seriously.
hallween_jack pointed out neither Clinton nor Obama have appointed a justice as crazy as Scalia and you said to people of Scalia’s bent a militant atheist is just as crazy. But militant atheists don’t exist on the Supreme Court so that means, what…?
I agree. Politicians should never make references to prayer, god, blessings and swear oaths on the bible, koran, or any other religious document. Perhaps Scalia should just keep his mouth shut so as not to exclude any of his fellow citizens in any way, shape, or form from the idea that justice wears a blindfold so she can weigh the evidence without any bias (I refer to the image of Lady Justice). Enough said.
[quote=“Scalia”]
You travel in circles that are so, so removed from mainstream America that you are appalled that anybody would believe in the Devil! [/quote]
So I guess I don’t get all the name calling, the “bat-shit insane” bullshit. I know, I know “Conservative BAD! Scalia eat puppies!” I didn’t say you had the like the guy. But when he shares a view that ~68% of Americans have (that the devil exists), it is hardly insane, bat-shit or otherwise.
To expand what was quoted by the person above me:
Are you so out of touch with most of America, most of which believes in the Devil? I mean, Jesus Christ believed in the Devil! It’s in the Gospels! You travel in circles that are so, so removed from mainstream America that you are appalled that anybody would believe in the Devil! Most of mankind has believed in the Devil, for all of history. Many more intelligent people than you or me have believed in the Devil.
Not only is Scalia saying that he believes in the Devil, but he is arguing that anyone who does not is out of touch of mainstream America. I think it is a problem when he starts arguing that his beliefs are the “correct” ones and that anyone who disagrees with him is offensive and not part of the mainstream.
Out of curiosity, I searched and found that a recent survey showed that about 57% of Americans believe that the Devil exists: Poll Results: Exorcism | YouGov
Reality, meet Justice Scalia… Justice. Scalia meet Reality.
I really feel you two should be introduced, become acquainted…
How much of the US higher leadership are religious nuts?
It does when said beliefs are batshitting-crazy fucking beliefs.
What a shock. Catholic man believes in tenets of the Catholic religion.
So if EVERYONE is stupid and crazy, that’s the acceptable NORM.
Gotcha. Standards LOWERED.
It does when his beliefs are blasted LUNACY.
He’s entitled to be as much a farting lunatic as he likes - it also means he’s not qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice who SHOULD BE a rational actor in our Democracy.
If this isn’t an Onion piece then this is genuinely terrifying.
The guy should be institutionalised - how is this different to any other kind of paranoid delusion?
