Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

gregcrawford

(2,382 posts)
33. Overlooking foibles and peccadilloes...
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:53 PM
Feb 2016

... to maintain civility in the workplace is one thing – I've done that for 50+ years – but I do not believe one can conveniently compartmentalize a reprehensible position, that might cost a man his life, from that jurist's character in general. Scalia taking Ginsberg to the opera does not excuse him from responsibility for decisions that might cost innocent people their lives, and Notorious RBG shouldn't excuse or compartmentalize it, either.

I've had to work with some truly vile people in my career, but I didn't have to like them or go to the opera with them. I think the people one chooses as friends says a great deal about one's character. Even if I were a Supreme Court Justice, I would NOT call Antonin Scalia a friend. I would be civil him in the workplace, which is more respect than he afforded others, by rumors I've heard over the years, but I would never invite him over for dinner. One cannot hold views like his and call one's self a good person.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Oh come off of it. He took Ruth Ginsberg to the opera jberryhill Feb 2016 #1
And what does it say about Ruthie... gregcrawford Feb 2016 #15
It says she likes a good opera jberryhill Feb 2016 #16
It says she liked him for his good facets. Hortensis Feb 2016 #22
Correct, as I said, it's not as if these decisions affected them jberryhill Feb 2016 #26
And it has never appeared to me... gregcrawford Feb 2016 #28
Couldn't Agree More RobinA Feb 2016 #31
That is NOT what I meant. Notorious RBG is a Hortensis Feb 2016 #29
Who said she's not a fine woman jberryhill Feb 2016 #30
Overlooking foibles and peccadilloes... gregcrawford Feb 2016 #33
I agree with everything you have written in this thread. nt laundry_queen Feb 2016 #40
Justices attempt to influence outcomes Hortensis Feb 2016 #42
He had a very strange concept of justice. nm rhett o rick Feb 2016 #2
"Mere" Iggo Feb 2016 #3
That is the part that got to me too Sanity Claws Feb 2016 #6
It is, if you're an authoritarian. malthaussen Feb 2016 #11
THIS! Authoritarians feel that maintaining a strong Hortensis Feb 2016 #23
In Guy Sajer's book, The Forgotten Soldier, is an unforgettable vignette: malthaussen Feb 2016 #25
Authoritarianism relies on blind adherence to the status quo Major Nikon Feb 2016 #44
The title of the OP is apparently not an actual quote, though widely reported as such. nt eppur_se_muova Feb 2016 #18
but, but, his family and RBG loved him so... mountain grammy Feb 2016 #4
Can we dance now without all the sad people telling us that we are SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #5
Most of those are right wing types anyway SwankyXomb Feb 2016 #17
you noticed that too. KG Feb 2016 #21
I noticed it too laundry_queen Feb 2016 #41
But he was a jenus! Brilliant mind, just look at his solid logic for sending an innocent person Rex Feb 2016 #7
That's been on my mind the last few days. The fact that ANYONE would reduce innocence.... Liberal Veteran Feb 2016 #8
Hence lastone Feb 2016 #9
My two cents FiveGoodMen Feb 2016 #10
well said kpete Feb 2016 #19
and mere factual death is no reason to confer respect on a piece of shit. Solly Mack Feb 2016 #12
Everything you need to know about this person is in that one sentence Scalded Nun Feb 2016 #13
I can't understanding how some of the pundits following his death are avaistheone1 Feb 2016 #14
Fat Tony was brilliant ... GeorgeGist Feb 2016 #20
Brilliance is no guarantee of decency. white_wolf Feb 2016 #24
And for me, that is the key. Ilsa Feb 2016 #36
A philosophical question: malthaussen Feb 2016 #47
"I didn't agree with his OUTcomes. But he had intelligent reasoning behind them all." HughBeaumont Feb 2016 #27
Oh, but don't gravedance. Act_of_Reparation Feb 2016 #32
Reminds of the parental philosophy Karma13612 Feb 2016 #34
Um, wouldn't factual innocence imply that the death sentence had not been properly reached? KamaAina Feb 2016 #35
No. Why would it? (nt) Recursion Feb 2016 #38
Legally, not at all. malthaussen Feb 2016 #45
This is the kind of amoral legalistic nitpicking that makes people hate lawyers. Odin2005 Feb 2016 #37
That's one way of looking at it. malthaussen Feb 2016 #46
I'm against the death penalty but I pretty much see his point there Recursion Feb 2016 #39
Kick and rec for our republican visitors. Kingofalldems Feb 2016 #43
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»SCALIA: "Mere factua...»Reply #33