In an interview with 365gay.com earlier this week, Rep. Barney Frank, a member of the House leadership, was asked about the status of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a 1996 law that contradicts the Constitution’s “full faith and credit” clause by permitting states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage conducted in other states.
– Rep. Frank
Frank responded, “I wouldn’t want it to go to the United States Supreme Court now because that homophobe Antonin Scalia has too many votes on this current court.”
Justice Scalia’s office has declined to comment, but Frank has responded to calls from media figures that he apologize by clarifying his remarks — a clarification that contains not a whiff of regret:
“What a ‘homophobe’ means is someone who has prejudice about gay people,” Frank told WBZ radio, arguing that Scalia’s judicial writing “makes it very clear that he’s angry, frankly, about the existence of gay people.”
In particular, Frank cited Scalia’s opinion in the 2003 case Lawrence v. Texas, in which the Supreme Court struck down state laws barring consensual acts of sodomy. In his dissent, Scalia wrote that the 6-3 vote served to ratify an “agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.”
“If you read his opinion, he thinks it’s a good idea for two consenting adults who happen to be gay to be locked up because he is so disapproving of gay people,” Frank said yesterday.
Frank expanded his response on CNN:
In an earlier case in Colorado, in which he again vigorously denounced the majority in the court for finding that it was unconstitutional to discriminate against people, again, not in marriage but a basis of their political rights, he said, “Well, of course, we disapprove this. We often disapprove of things like murder.” I mean, literally, when he was looking for comparisons to the public disapproval of homosexuality, the first thing he said was murder.
So unlike many people who have different legitimate views on this, I urge people to read those two opinions in the Colorado case, the Romer case and the Lawrence case. And, again, there is just no question about his absolute view that … homosexuals are bad people that shouldn’t be treated equally.
It’s puzzling that people like Scalia who feel that antipathy toward gay people is justified by the Bible (or whatever), don’t like to be labeled as “homophobes.” If they believe their bigotry is justified — especially so if it’s blessed by God — what difference does it make what others call them?
Antonin Scalia is a conservative Catholic and his judicial writings are not surprising. I would urge him, though, to look closely at the Church’s teachings regarding this and it will become plain to him that they are based on a selective reading of certain passages in the Bible. Interestingly enough, there are hundreds of other passages that are routinely ignored. Would Scalia like to jail heterosexual adulterers? There are far more passages condeming that than there are condeming homosexuality.