Is nation ready for straight Supreme Ct. Justice?

Would the left accept a heterosexual Supreme Court justice?


(spoof)

INSIGHTS by J. Crews - editor
May 21, 2009

There appears to be a real possibility that President Obama's first nominee to the Supreme Court could be an openly heterosexual justice. For the record, given the administration's declared intention to move forward on repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", and the momentum of the gay marriage movement, I'm not sure a heterosexual can be confirmed.

So a lot of people are asking the gay community whether they'd oppose a nominee solely for his/her sexuality, and there's a big deal being made out of the most common answer: NO! Mario Armando Lavandeira, an American blogger and television personality said that heterosexuality should not be a "determinant" in deciding whether to oppose a nominee. (Who is Armando Lavandeira?)

"We don't think that the process of selecting a Supreme Court justice should include asking questions about a person's personal sex life", stated Lavandeira. "But if a person does publicly identify as straight or asexual, or particularly if a person has been involved with heterosexual marriage activism at any level, then there would have to be serious questions asked about whether he or she would impose a pro-Levitican Biblical theology on the court and the nation."

Still, I'm not sure why people are so surprised that liberal groups are taking this position publicly, and I don't think it's that significant. Yes, it might be a sign of Americans' increasing intolerance towards Levitican ideology, but that's not a new development. And even when there was more acceptance, taking a public stance against a nominee solely because of their sexual orientation wouldn't have been a good move. Americans generally like to believe we're more tolerant as a country than we actually are, and never respond well to outright bigotry, even when they might otherwise sympathize with the prejudices being expressed. In a poll a decade ago 82 percent of respondents believed heterosexuality was genetically determined, but in a recent poll only 22 percent of respondents stated this belief. Clearly the tide has turned against the old belief systems. And in politics, belief trumps scientific reality.

"We don't accept that heterosexuality is any kind of cultural identity that should be sought in a judge," said a gay rights activist from Lambda Legal. "We just think it's a flawed behavior that should not be held up as a role model."

Besides, as Lavandeira himself observes, there's little chance that LGBT groups will back anyone RUSH LIMBAUGH chooses, regardless of their sexuality, especially of the Hetero sapien species. So there's good reason to stake out this position now -- that way, if the eventual nominee is heterosexual, they can say their opposition isn't solely about who they are as a person but the way they'd perform on the bench. It would not be based on their sexuality, but on their moral behavior.


See more like this at www.ProgressivePost.com