Skip to main content

View Diary: Scalia and His Cobweb Thinking (3 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The problem with Scalia's argument, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    in a nutshell, is that there is often a difference between our principles and our actions. To put it in terms Scalia might understand, sometimes we can't see the mote in our neighbor's eye due to the huge plank in our own.

    The Constitution can readily be seen to be based on a set of principles:

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
    So the Constitution provides for some very specific liberties including the right to free speech, freedom of and from religion, freedom of the press, and so forth. It also recognizes (in the Ninth Amendment) that other rights exist which are not specifically listed in the Constitution.

    As humans, subject to human frailties, we often fail to live up to our ideals on an individual level. For example,  might resolve to achieve a minimal carbon footprint, but still want to buy an SUV. A good friend would, I hope, point out that contradiction between my principles and my intentions; if I'm wise, I'll listen to that friend and adjust my behavior.

    Similarly, even a long-established violation of the Constitution's rights and principles is still a violation. It is the duty of the Supreme Court to identify and correct such violations. For a Justice to refuse to do so is akin to him insisting on keeping that plank in his own eye, and the mote in his neighbor's.

    (Note: I am not a lawyer, just a bit of a Constitutional law geek.)

    Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

    by Nowhere Man on Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 10:07:21 AM PDT

    •  I think the real problem is that Scalia opposes (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Nowhere Man

      the Incorporation Doctrine.   Simply put, he thinks the states should be allowed to be theocracies and enforce Catholic sharia law.   That much was clear from his dissent in Lawrence v Texas.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site