Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Barney Frank clarifies âhomophobeâ comment
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) hit the news circuit on Tuesday and Wednesday, explaining why he called Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia a homophobe in an interview with 365gay.
“What a âhomophobeâ means is someone who has prejudice about gay people,” Frank told Boston radio station WBZ. Scalia, he said, “makes it very clear that heâs angry, frankly, about the existence of gay peopleâ in his written opinions.In a statement released yesterday, Frank said, “The point is that Justice Scalia goes far beyond simply denying that there is a constitutional right here and makes clear his support for the discriminatory policies based on his condemnation of homosexuality.”
Frank pointed to the 2003 Supreme Court case Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down anti-sodomy laws.
The Court voted 6-3 to eliminate sodomy laws, but in a strong dissent, Scalia said that the ruling served an “agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.”
Frank told WBZ, “If you read [Scaliaâs] opinion, he thinks itâs a good idea for two consenting adults who happen to be gay to be locked up because he is so disapproving of gay people.”
He told CNN that there are âTwo opinions written by Justice Scalia in which he makes it very clear that he thinks it’s a terrible idea for people who are gay or lesbian to have equal rights. It’s not based on his views on marriage. Obviously, there’s a legitimate debate about marriage.â
Frank also referred to the 1996 Supreme Court case Romer v. Evans, in which the Court struck down Coloradoâs anti-gay Amendment 2, which prevented any municipality from protecting people based on their sexual orientation. Frank said that Scalia âagain vigorously denounced the majority in the court for finding that it was unconstitutional to discriminate against people, again, not in marriage but a basis of their political rights, he said, âWell, of course, we disapprove this. We often disapprove of things like murder.â
âI mean, literally, when he was looking for comparisons to the public disapproval of homosexuality, the first thing he said was murder,â Frank said.
Frankâs clarifications came after an interview with 365gayâs Ross Palombo, in which Frank said that the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman in federal law, would eventually go to the Supreme Court â but he said, “I wouldnât want it to go to the United States Supreme Court now because that homophobe Antonin Scalia has too many votes on this current court.”
Barney Frank is a wonderful US Representative from Massachusettes. He is not a US Senator. Yet. We have never had an openly gay US Senator in the USA.
And people, it doesn’t help our cause to keep on referring to “gay rights”. There’s no such thing as ‘gay rights’, only EQUAL rights – and gay PEOPLE don’t have them in America. Currently, the betterosexuals have SPECIAL rights that gay citizens don’t have. That must change, but it won’t until we stop using the misnomer “gay rights”. Ain’t no such thing.
During the Civil Rights struggles of the mid 20th century, we never once heard the term “black rights”. Or “white rights”, for that matter. It was always either “civil rights” or “equal rights” and that is exactly what gay American citizens should be seeking.
Why should Barney Frank have to justify or explain his comment about Antonin Scalia! Scalia has never justified his comments about us and had any concern about our opinion. He’s a HOMOPHOBE. HOMOPHOBE, look it up in the dictionary, the shoe fits, wear it!
Just as a side not, Romer v. Evans was decided in 1996, not 1986. The amendment, Amendment 2, did not pass until 1992. The 1986 case was Bowers v. Hardwick, and was decided on June 30, 1986. Scalia did not join the Court until the end of September of that year.
I have “moral oppobrium” against @ssholes like Scalia. His brand of prejudice needs to be eliminated posthaste.
Comparing consenting, loving, committed relationships to murder. Heaven spare us fromsuch “love”.
So much for “liberty (!) and JUSTICE for ALL” in America.
When I was in law school a number of years ago, Scalia came to our school a couple of times. Each time I heard him speak, he used his opportunity to slam gay rights in one way or another. Mostly he was just dismissive and sarcastic about the notion that gay people are, in any sense, entitled to equality. He used these opportunities to try to get a laugh out of his audience, at the expense of the LGBT law students and faculty who were in the room. I walked out of his second speech because I had had enough. If this isn’t homophobic behavior, I don’t know what is.
Romer v. Evans was decided in 1996 not 1986.
Barney is exactly right to call Scalia a homophobe. His dissents in the Romer v. Evans and Texas v. Lawrence cases are a disgrace. They are not judicial analyses, but political rants. Scalia is a political hack, not a constitutional scholar. That is why so many Republicans love him.
I’m just glad barney had the balls to call the ’spade’ what he is… a ’spade’!
Gerry, there’s no defence required for the use of “homophobe” to describe people who may not fear us. People with hydrophobia aren’t afraid of water either — they have rabies. The etymology of a word doesn’t determine its current meaning. It’s like the constitution that way.
Gerry Fisher….the thing is..it IS about fear and feeling threatened. If you recall Bush’s statement immediately after hearing that Massachusetts had passed marriage equality, he said that allowing us to marry “threatened” the institution of marriage and society in general and children would grow up confused, veiled homophobic statement if ever there were. If a gay man hits on a straight man, you can bet that the straight man’s reaction will in many cases resort to either verbal or physical abuse against the gay man. It IS a fear that they’ve been conditioned to accept throughout centuries of brainwashing mostly with its origins in religious cults. The majority of straight men I think are definitely threatened by our orientation because they don’t understand it and buy into the stereotypical myths about orientation and most don’t want to understand it. Some of course have other issues and conflicts going on in regard to their orientation and many of them deflect those conflicts and feelings by taking a defensive attitude associated with stigma, guilt by association and fear of being discovered. Many criminals who’ve physically harmed or killed gay people often have a lot of unresolved orientation issues going on that barely ever surface until they go on trial and court psychiatrists or psychologists are asked to provide opinions on the behavior of the defendant.
Barney Frank is right about Scalia though, right on target.
“Homophobic” has always been a difficult word to define, defend, and use consistently. I agree with Barney, in that he defined it as most of us in the gay community understand it. But, what adds to the confusion in the straight community is the “phobic” (fear) part.
Many people who are disgusted with us and hate us either 1) Don’t fear us, or 2) The fear is so deeply buried that they are not at all in touch with it (why hate something, if you’re not, in some way, afraid of it or threatened by it?).
We’ve experimented with other terms, but none have stuck. Heterocentrist being one, which I think describes most of Americans pretty well. They aren’t particularly afraid or hostile, it’s just that they think “hetero” so strongly that it’s hard for them to wrap their minds around “homo.” (The same could be said for any “ism.”)
If Justice Scalia (and I use the title lightly as his writings seem to indicate he is not interested in justice) writes using comments such as <> It shows he is not interested in upholding the rights of all citizens , but more of upholding his own personal “Moral Justice”
Read the definition for opprobrium >.the disgrace or the reproach incurred by conduct considered outrageously shameful; infamy.
I most assuredly am NOT ashamed of being who I am, of Loving the man I do (my same sex) he should be ashamed of himself for such opprobrium writings.
Of course he is a homophobe. Gays get it, but I think it’s a good idea for Frank to explain it to those str8s who somehow don’t
Call it what it is, he IS a HOMOPHOBE and Mr. Frank you don’t have to apologize or justify squat to him or anyone else!
We don’t need to be “weak sissies”, that will play into stereotype that someone like Scalia has for you or other gays.