Thursday, October 08, 2009

Impeach Scalia

...the fear of them rattled us (heershee-oo) / their sign made things hard for us(?) (heekeesh-oo)                                                                                                                                                      ----Tisha B'Av Kina
[As the gloss explains, "their sign" is the cross Crusaders attached to their clothing and flags.]

Like most of the universe, I'm astounded to learn that a Supreme Court Justice believes that a cross is a suitable and appropriate memorial for non-Christians. Here's the highlight from yesterday's oral arguments on Buono v. Salazar as reported by that Hebe from Slate, Dalia Lithwik:
Justice Antonin Scalia...  looks particularly queasy when Peter Eliasberg—the ACLU lawyer whose client objects to crosses on government land—suggests partway through the morning that perhaps a less controversial World War I memorial might consist of "a statue of a soldier which would honor all of the people who fought for America in World War I and not just the Christians."

"The cross doesn't honor non-Christians who fought in the war?" Scalia asks, stunned.

"A cross is the predominant symbol of Christianity, and it signifies that Jesus is the son of God and died to redeem mankind for our sins," replies Eliasberg, whose father and grandfather are both Jewish war veterans.

"It's erected as a war memorial!" replies Scalia. "I assume it is erected in honor of all of the war dead. The cross is the most common symbol of … of … of the resting place of the dead."

Eliasberg dares to correct him: "The cross is the most common symbol of the resting place of Christians. I have been in Jewish cemeteries. There is never a cross on a tombstone of a Jew."

"I don't think you can leap from that to the conclusion that the only war dead the cross honors are the Christian war dead," thunders Scalia. "I think that's an outrageous conclusion!"
The fact that this fat windbag thinks a cross is a suitable way to honor Jewish war dead is what's really outrageous. As for the issue under discussion, I don't mind that a cross was erected 80 years ago, and would be content to let it stay where it is for historical reasons. What I can't abide, however, is this jackdonkey judge's idea that the "The cross is the most common symbol of … of … of the resting place of the dead" or his inability to understand why, after 2000 years of Christian anti-Semitism, a Jew might not want to spend eternity resting under Chritianity's most beloved icon. See this for more on the story.

Search for more information about Scalia the fat idiot at

No comments: