- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
AmSpecBlog
Not Exactly Don't Ask, Don't Tell
This strikes me as more than a little over the top. A news story suggests that President Obama is under pressure to name the first openly gay Supreme Court justice. Even the religious right leader quoted in the story says his organization will focus on the nominee's judicial philosophy. The ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee says, "I'm not inclined to think that would be an automatic disqualification." But it is the Republicans who are focused on sexual orientation?
None of the Republican senators quoted say they will vote against a judicial nominee because he or she is gay. The closest any of them comes to saying such a nominee would be unwise is Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.). But it's okay for the president to nominate someone because of their sexual orientation. And anything less than unbridled enthusiasm shows an unhealthy obsession with sexual orientation. We live in interesting times.
Comments
Leave a Comment
Pingback| 5.7.09 @ 11:40AM
Not Exactly Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell | But As For Me links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Carlos| 5.7.09 @ 11:41AM
You sure we don't already have a gay Justice? I've been kind of surprised that gays aren't demanding that the gay seat stay in gay hands.
Dean| 5.7.09 @ 12:39PM
Richard John Neuhaus used to say, "Where orthodoxy is optional, it will soon be proscribed."
Do you really think that the gay rights movement will stop at live and let live? Orthodoxy in human sexuality -- traditional marriage -- has become optional, and is now on its way to being prohibited.