The Anti Catholic Attack by CBS on Justice Scalia

Poor Justice Scalia he seems to be coming under attack this week a lot.

Now is prepared for the insane rants of Congressman Barney Frank. However when it come from the CBS's own legal analyst it become in a way more troublesome.

See Original Sin: Scalia Unplugged

This article is so wrong in so many ways. In fact I highly suspect that this CBS legal "mind" will quickly find that even those that disagree with Scalia will be attacking this horrible piece.

From the Conservative side National Review quite quickly points out just a few falsehoods. See

Somewhere, Edward R. Murrow is Weeping
Andrew Cohen’s Evidence-Free Anti-Scalia Jeremiad
Re: Andrew Cohen's Jeremiad

However what is shocking is the "Know Nothing" anti Catholic Tone

In a remarkable five-part series of interviews posted last week, the conservative and deeply devout ideologue, who believes that the Constitution must be applied narrowly as written with only the original intent of the Framers to guide modern jurists, consistently evoked the religious notion of sinful temptation to describe how so many of the rest of us have come to believe otherwise. He has said many of these things before -- but perhaps never as casually.


In Scalia’s cloistered world, the judges, lawyers, and politicians who have enabled the Constitution’s scripture to be interpreted broadly enough to be used to try to erase segregation or discrimination or prisoner abuse, or to try to protect and expand privacy rights, are really just weak sinners who couldn’t resist the urge to meddle. Adam bit the apple. The Supreme Court desegregated schools. Both failed miserably in Justice Scalia’s eyes. .......

Scalia responded with all the drama of a television preacher. “I’ll put it that way. I’m certainly fighting back to get to where we used to be…

(Inever understood until now just how deeply Justice Scalia’s legal philosophies and tactics are dictated by his religious fervor. Judges with whom he disagrees aren’t just wrong they are “willful” and “distorting.” The nation’s continued rejection (in the main) of Originalist doctrine is based not upon historical weaknesses in the doctrine itself, or upon our general acceptance of judges as change agents when the other two branches have failed, but upon wicked “temptation” oozing out to jurists who have no faith or who just haven’t seen the light.

This is the jurisprudence of the self-righteous; where faith in the omniscience of the Constitution’s founders dwarfs all of the evidence we now have that the rich, white, often-slave-owning men who negotiated the terms of the document (and the Bill of Rights) were just as prone to vice, self-interest, and poor judgment as their political successors. Scalia is still a true believer in “original intent” because it’s in his religious, faithful, prayerful nature to believe in things he cannot know. The irony, of course, reaching truly religious proportions, is that this Manichean world of black and white, right and wrong, good and evil, is precisely the opposite of what the world and art of judging are.

Now as pointed out in the above links this CBS legal analysis can't even get Scalia's fundamental views down. SCALIA I REPEAT SCALIA Does not believe in Original Intent.

However the anti Catholic tone is incredible. Scalia actually believes all that Catholic hocus pocus and thus is a danger.

What is ironic though that in Catholic blogs and legal areas the issue that is always debated is not Scalia bringing his Catholic Principles into his day job but the FACT that he does not do this.

This is widely acknowledged. For instance Scalia's skepticism on applying the natural law is well know. He even debates people in the Vatican on it.



Foley told an interesting anecdote about a visit he had from Justice Scalia and his wife in Rome several years ago. Recalling his doctoral dissertation on natural law, Foley said he offered examples to Scalia of cases in which the Warren Court had "transcended mere positive law" to reach its results. In both Brown v. Board of Education and Gideon v. Wainwright, Foley said, the Court resorted to principles of equality that went beyond written law. Foley said Scalia disagreed with him until his wife Maureen interjected, "Oh admit it, Nino, the archbishop was right." As the audience laughed, Foley added that Mrs. Scalia is "a woman of exceptional taste and discernment."

The lack of all the Catholic Justices to entertain Natural law viewpoints has been a bone of contention on both the right and the left. The more progressive in thought Catholic Blog VOX NOVA is a prime example where these complaints are lodged

But don't let the facts get in the way.

DO not underestimate the ANTI Catholic and for that matter ANTI Christian message. That is the believers on the Court are scary business