Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is facing criticism for
making so-called anti-homosexual statements, though some believe
his comments were right on target.
Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel Action tells OneNewsNow that
when Scalia was asked by a homosexual student at a Princeton University appearance why he
equates laws dealing with homosexuality with those that bar murder,
the Supreme Court justice defended his writings by declaring that
moral issues can be restricted by law. "I don't think it's
necessary, but I think it's effective," the associate justice
responded during the Q&A session on Monday.
"If we cannot have laws prohibiting forms of sexual
behavior, or that at least don't elevate and recognize forms of
sexual behavior that have historically been considered immoral,
then the law means nothing," Barber reasons.
While he acknowledges that homosexual conduct and murder are
different issues, the attorney submits that both have a moral
impact on society.
"But insofar as homosexual behavior is a deviant form of human
sexuality and that it deviates from natural sexuality between male
and female as we were unequivocally biologically designed, Justice
Scalia is right," Barber states.
"In a world that is embracing moral relativism, Justice Scalia
is a voice for the reality that there are things that are true and
there are things that are not true," the Liberty Counsel
attorney continues. He points out that every major religion
for thousands of years has frowned on homosexual behavior. In fact,
he adds, there are laws against it in many countries.
Scalia says he does not equate sodomy with murder, but he does
draw a parallel between the bans on both.
A Judeo-Christian law firm is pleased that a federal judge has
ruled that a pro-Muslim organization can be a defendant in a
lawsuit alleging civil rights violations against Christian