When a judge goes beyond [his proper function] and reads entirely new values into the Constitution, values the framers and ratifiers did not put there, he deprives the people of their liberty. That liberty, which the Constitution clearly envisions, is the liberty of the people to set their own social agenda through the process of democracy.

There can be no doubt that the systematic hostility of the courts to religion has lowered the prestige of religion in the public mind.

Our country is being radically altered, step by step, by Justices who are not following any law.

It is a ship with a great deal of sail but a very shallow keel.

By depriving the charged person of any defenses [the rulings] mean that sexual dalliance, however voluntarily engaged in, becomes harassment whenever an employee sees fit, after the fact, so to characterize it.

The major obstacle to a religious renewal is the intellectual classes, who are highly influential and tend to view religion as primitive superstition. They believe that science has left atheism as the only respectable intellectual stance.

In a constitutional democracy the moral content of law must be given by the morality of the framer or legislator, never by the morality of the judge.