AFA Says 'No' To Gay SCOTUS Nominee Because Homosexuality Used To Be Illegal
As President Obama considers his upcoming Supreme Court nomination, the religious right is pushing forcefully against the possibility of an openly gay justice. Focus on the Family issued a statement yesterday signaling that the group would oppose any gay nominee. Today, the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer -- who recently argued that all Muslims should be deported unless they convert to Christianity -- has posted a screed arguing that it's impossible for a gay judge to be impartial:
A homosexual judge cannot help but give the home-field advantage to every legal team appearing before him who represents homosexual causes. It will be impossible for the visiting team, the team representing sexual normalcy and natural marriage, to get a fair shake in his courtroom. [...]
Cases involving same-sex marriage are sure to arrive before the Court. Cases involving domestic partnerships and homosexual adoptions are sure to arrive before the Court. Cases involving special rights for homosexuals in the workplace are sure to arrive before the Court. Cases involving homosexual service in the military are sure to arrive before the Court.
Only an utter fool could convince himself that an active homosexual judge could be impartial in rendering judgment on such cases. The scales of "justice" would be tipped irrevocably toward the homosexual agenda and it would be moronic to think otherwise.
With an active homosexual on the bench, Lady Justice will no longer even pretend to be blind. She will be peeking out from under her blindfold to determine the sexual preference of those standing before her, then will let the fold slip back into place before ruling in every case to legitimize sexual deviancy.
Many on the right made similar arguments against Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the first Hispanic member of the court. The obvious problem with this logic is that nobody questions whether white judges are biased on matters of race or whether Christian judges are biased on matters of faith. I suppose one might argue that only minorities are affected, but conservative Justice Clarence Thomas would likely disagree.
Fischer adds, "If we elevate an open homosexual to the Supreme Court, we will be elevating someone who freely admits that he (generic use) engages routinely in behavior that was still a felony in every state in the Union as recently as 1962 and a felony in the other 49 states until 1972."