Republican Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is known to be virulently anti-gay (and anti-masturbation). And his son, Paul, is as well.
We’ve written about Paul Scalia before. He works for a Catholic group that claims it can “cure” gays. Which is ironic since the largest “ex-gay” group out there, Exodus International, just admitted that the whole “pray away the gay” thing is a crock.
Well, now it seems that Paul Scalia is claiming that homosexuality doesn’t even exist (which is interesting, since he’s trying to cure something that doesn’t exist).
Paul Scalia, like most anti-gay religious bigots, believes that he’s the one who’s truly oppressed since society refuses to tolerate his intolerance of gay people. Scalia writes:
Consider how swiftly American society has changed as regards homosexuality. The “Stonewall riots,” the touchstone and unofficial beginning of the gay rights movement, occurred in June 1969. Since then, the demands from the gay community have progressed from simple tolerance, to acceptance, to the right to marry, to now the silencing of any opposition as bigoted and “homophobic.” Those who once insisted on tolerance for their lifestyle will now tolerate no disagreement. Society now requires everyone’s approval of what not long ago was regarded as morally abhorrent.
Yes, yes, yes and no. We absolutely do demand tolerance, acceptance and the right to marry. But who said that the Scalia boys were no longer permitted to be hateful homophobic bigots? It seems both are excelling at it.
Young Paul Scalia is suffering from the same malady that afflicts many a conservative. They suffer from the delusion that the First Amendment gives them the right to not only speak, but to speak with impunity. In their warped world view, the only way that they can have free speech is for you to have no speech.
So Catholics leaders, for example, are free to bash gays, and blacks, and latinos, and women – and rape children – but if you speak up about them bashing gays, blacks, latinos, women – and raping children – you’re the bad person because you dared to challenge them.
More from Scalia’s son, who now is worried about using the word “homosexual,” which is ironic since the word itself is actually anti-gay, and that’s why the religious right routinely uses it:
In this regard we must note the unfortunate title The Homosexual Person (and therefore also the unfortunate title of the CDF document). In short, we should not predicate “homosexual” of any person. That does a disservice to the dignity of the human person by collapsing personhood into sexual inclinations. The chronology of the books helps us to see the development in this area of language. Indeed, the Church is still trying to find the right vocabulary to speak about this modern phenomenon. Thus in his last book, Father Harvey ceased using the term “homosexual” or “homosexual person.” His thought and ministry brought him to realize that it is better to speak of someone with “same-sex attractions.” Although lacking brevity and ease of speech, this phrase has the virtue of precision. It acknowledges both the person/attraction distinction and the complexity of the condition – not fairly summarized as an “orientation.”
I often wonder whether a lot of these men so fixated on gay people aren’t harboring their own inner-gay. Read this from Scalia the younger:
In this radical transformation of society, one of the greatest casualties is the individual who experiences homosexual attractions but who desires to live chastity.
And isn’t that the real issue here. The right of closeted celibate gay men to be left alone in their own little self-imposed prison of self-loathing.
Sounds a lot like a Catholic priest.