A Rare Admission From Antonin Scalia

Antonin Scalia, clearly the most ultraconservative and asinine member of the Supreme Court of the United States of America, made a rare admission while participating in a discussion of the First Amendment with Justice Breyer and a moderator. The event was aired on C-Span and it was very public.

Breyer and Antonin were debating their views on the establishment clause of the First Amendment, its purpose, and the manner in which it should be applied. Scalia has taken the strict constructionist view that purports to rely on the text alone (but has never really been applied in that manner... even by Scalia) on the entire Constitution. His position on the First Amendment, as stated by him during this event, was to rely on that approach.

However, during the discussion, Breyer pointed out that, using the logic of syntax and grammar (which is the substance of Scalia's own position) and employing the methods of logic taught in school and college, the understanding of the First Amendment actually precludes Scalia's interpretation and application. In response to Breyer's criticism and statement on logic, Scalia said, "I never took a course in logic."

Well, well! We must now wonder at the audacity of this particular ultraconservative to demand such stringent reading of the text of the US Constitution when he admittedly does not have a background in basic logic. As a teacher of Philosophy, Communications, Forensic Debate, Applied Ethics and Basic Logic (from the electronic, mathematical and linguistic perspectives), I know that the understanding and application of logic is fundamental to the task set before us by our founders and framers. No one that cannot employ the basic understanding and application of logic, including the ability to recognize false statements, faulty generalizations, stereotypes, emotional appeals and other flaws in forensic debates--which is what the practice of law ultimately boils down to in our system of jurisprudence--should be on the bench at any level of the judiciary.

So, not only is Scalia prone to being a foul-mouthed antagonist of the press (c.f. the swearing and obscene gesture incidents last year), and a influence peddling taker of freebies (c.f. reports of his taking gifts of significant value while attending conferences), he is an asinine ultraconservative that apparently doesn't understand the tools of his own trade... or how to read our Constitution.

Amazing. Stupid, but simply amazing.