STRICT CONSTITUTIONALIST?

Even the radical homosexuals know that Judge Roberts is not actually a strict constitutionalist. How come Christians and conservatives are so blind that they think he is? The far-left lavendar lobby is actually considering not opposing Roberts. That should alarm any Christian conservative with the discernment of a baking potato.

The radical queer website 365gay.com ran an article on Judge Roberts by Doreen Brandt called, "Roberts Waffles On Issues Involving Gay Rights". Of course nothing short of Barney Frank would totally appease these guys, so the fact that they accuse Roberts of 'waffling' on the sodomite agenda means that he has leaned their way. In it, they quoted Judge Roberts as saying some interesting things that should greatly concern Christian conservatives.

After saying Tuesday that he supported the constitutional guarantee of privacy he refused on Wednesday to say how far that would extend.

The right to privacy has been a key factor in a whole series of LGBT civil rights cases - the most important of which was the 2003 Supreme Court ruling overturning sodomy laws. (story) The ruling was later cited in the Massachusetts high court ruling that struck down the prohibition on same-sex marriage (story) and has been used to fight child custody cases involving gay parents.

Despite prodding to define privacy Roberts would not indicate if he defined it narrowly or broadly. He then confounded Democrats further by saying that the privacy right he accepts is endorsed by every current Supreme Court justice “to some extent or another.’’

That's what the invented and twisted right to "privacy" has brought us, and Roberts supports that. It's odd that we have some twisted right to privacy when a woman wants to kill her baby or a sodomite wants his perversion legally recognized, but we have no privacy when it comes to being undressed in airports, having our bank records snooped by our gov't, purchasing a gun, contributing to a church, charity, or political cause, etc. etc.

He did however, suggest he differs with Thomas and Justice Antonin Scalia on their narrow view of the Constitution. Both believe the document must be interpreted literally.

Under questioning from Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa) Roberts said that words such as 'liberty' or 'equality' should not be given a "cramped or narrow construction," based solely on their meaning at the time the Constitution was written.

Now Roberts himself has plainly admitted that he is NOT a strict constitutionalist and he disagrees with the two Supreme Court justices who are. Yet many Bush-bot conservative Christians will insist Roberts is a strict constructionist - despite his own words to the contrary.