Policing the Boundaries of Morality.

A number of people have noted that after a weird outbreak of at least tentative reasonableness, Focus on the Family reversed itself this week and declared that no, they would absolutely not be open to the idea of a gay person on the Supreme Court, no matter how otherwise sane such a person might seem. The bigotry we've come to expect, but there's something else notable about the statement the group issued:

We can assure you that we recognize that homosexual behavior is a sin and does not reflect God's created intent and desire for humanity. Further, we at Focus do affirm that character and moral rectitude should be key considerations in appointing members of the judiciary, especially in the case of the highest court in the land. Sexual behavior — be it heterosexual or homosexual — certainly lies at the heart of personal morality.

Sexual behavior -- i.e., engaging only in a very specific set of allowable sexual activities, namely heterosexual sex between married men and women -- "lies at the heart of personal morality"? Really? So a schoolteacher who works long hours for low pay because of her commitment to children, volunteers her time in her community, and treats everyone she meets with respect and dignity, but has an active sex life with her longtime boyfriend, would be less "moral" than a con man and serial killer who steals from old ladies before killing them, but is married and never has sex with anyone but his wife?

I guess so. It's nice to know someone out there is worrying about whether the next Supreme Court justice is a "moral" person. Otherwise, who knows what kind of dirtbags we might let on the Court.

-- Paul Waldman

You need to be logged in to comment.
(If there's one thing we know about comment trolls, it's that they're lazy)

Connect
, after login or registration your account will be connected.
Advertisement