Trump Supreme Court Pick William Pryor Thinks Gays Should Be Jailed For Having Sex In Their Homes

By now you’ve probably heard Donald Trump’s remarks about same-sex marriage being “settled.” And yet, he’s also said that he’ll appoint conservative Supreme Court justices who’ll want to change the Roe v. Wade ruling affirming abortion rights.

You know, it’s hard to imagine a conservative judge that meets Trump’s approval who is against abortion but not equal marriage. We certainly know that at least one of his prospective Supreme Court nominees is no fan of the LGBT community. I’m talking about William H. Pryor Jr.

Lambda Legal, an advocacy group for LGBT people, called Pryor “the most demonstrably anti-gay judicial nominee in recent memory.” The group’s opposition to him dates all the way back to 2005.

Why? At the time they said he had “repeatedly shown clear hostility to the rights of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, transgender people and those with HIV – and also to women, people of color, disabled people and others.”

Their 2005 statement was the result of a 2003 legal brief in which Pryor upheld a Texas law criminalizing consensual LGBT sex, which he compared to “polygamy, incest, pedophilia, prostitution, and adultery”. What’s more, he argued that states should be able to prosecute gay people as criminals. According to Pryor then, LGBT people as a group were not protected by the Constitution.

“This Court has never recognized a fundamental right to engage in sexual activity outside of monogamous heterosexual marriage, let alone to engage in homosexual sodomy,” he wrote. “Such a right would be antithetical to the ‘traditional relation of the family’ that is ‘as old and as fundamental as our entire civilization.”

He also made the case for Texans to protect themselves from homosexuality:

“Texas is hardly alone in concluding that homosexual sodomy may have severe physical, emotional, psychological, and spiritual consequences, which do not necessarily attend heterosexual sodomy, and from which Texas’s citizens need to be protected.”

Also according to Pryor, there was “no fundamental right to engage in homosexual sodomy just because it is done behind closed doors… Because homosexual sodomy has not historically been recognized in this country as a right — to the contrary, it has historically been recognized as a wrong — it is not a fundamental right.”

Lambda Legal also made it a point to note that the judge cast a deciding vote that ultimately blocked Florida same-sex couples from adopting children in need of loving homes.

“Several judges on the appeals court wanted to hear the case and said the law raised ‘serious and substantial questions,’ but William Pryor kept that from happening,” wrote Kevin Cathcart, Lambda Legal’s executive director. “As a result, lesbians and gay men in Florida cannot adopt children who need permanent, loving homes.”

So yeah, maybe our concern is justified?

[UPDATE: Trump’s Anti-Gay Supreme Court Pick Allegedly Posed For Nudes Which Landed On Gay Porn Site]