‘Dying’ for Attention: Protesters Unleash the Undeniable Power of Passively Lying on the...
No Need to Hire a Comedian When AP ‘Journalist’ Unintentionally Provides Biggest Laugh...
Andrew McCabe Says Case Against Judge Hannah Dugan is Solid but Arrest Was...
Rachel Maddow and Jamie Raskin Reveal the Dem Party’s New DEI - Dramatic...
Scott Jennings Schools CNN Panelists on why President AOC Would Be a Nightmare...
Another Night Surrounded by Democrats, Scott Jennings Attends the White House Corresponden...
Ontario Must Pay for Man to Have a Vagina Constructed While Leaving His...
Social Worker Has Absolute Meltdown Over Student Loans
Democrats Keep Proving Me Right (and I Hate It)
County Attorney Requiring Prosecutors to Consider Race When Offering Plea Deals
Hello, Gaslight! Democrat Jason Crow Earns EPIC Ratio for Lying About What His...
Susan Rice Goes on a Rant About White Male Christian Cisgender Macho MAGA...
J.K. Rowling Wants THIS Video Saved for Future Generations to See How Stupid...
Conor McGregor Expresses His Support for Irish Marchers Against Mass Immigration
Cause They ARE! Adam Schiff Tells Bill Maher Even Voters In San Francisco...

Liberals attack Scalia for argument about homosexuality

During a lecture at Princeton University yesterday, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia addressed the topics of homosexuality and gay marriage. During the question-and-answer portion, a self-identified gay student asked Justice Scalia why he has equated laws banning sodomy with those prohibiting murder. Scalia responded as follows:

Advertisement

“It’s a form of argument that I thought you would have known, which is called the ‘reduction to the absurd.’ If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against other things?”

Scalia added that he does not equate sodomy with murder but draws a parallel between the bans on both inasmuch as both laws entail moral judgments. The nuances don’t matter to liberals, however, because Justice Scalia said the words “homosexuality” and “murder” in the same sentence, so he must mean they are morally equivalent. They took to Twitter to voice their displeasure and the mainstream media joined in as well.

https://twitter.com/TheRealRoseanne/status/278556088381628416

Advertisement

https://twitter.com/Dian8Keaton/status/278566950735581184

For the record, it appears that Justice Scalia is actually making a philosophical/logical argument about the basis of society’s morality. Essentially, he is asking: If people use their morals in one case, why can’t they use them in other cases? But soundbites are easier to attack. Let’s continue.

https://twitter.com/scarylawyerguy/status/278564955035418624

All of the sudden, liberals are pure textualists.

https://twitter.com/Jimi_We/status/278568048699531264

Advertisement

Well, that’s a start.

Reductio ad absurdum =  “In logic, a method employed to disprove an argument by illustrating how it leads to an absurd consequence.”

We couldn’t find a single tweet challenging Scalia’s logic. Instead, there were hundreds of personal attacks and a lot of questionable assumptions about how Scalia will vote on the Defense of Marriage Act. The “moral” of the story is: It doesn’t matter what you say; it only matters what liberals think you said.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos