After a little bit of thought, I do want to qualify one item that I mentioned yesterday. To me, an overriding principle in many cases is that a person has no obligation to answer a question that should not be asked, and if asked such a question, lying in response is not always morally corrupt. So asking Justice Scalia a question about his own sexual habits might seem to be out of bounds. And even if he does f--- his wife in the a-- all the time, he can justifiably answer "no" to that question even if he does do it.

As to whether that question was appropriate in the first place, I think I would still say yes, if the discussion up to that point had involved the right of states to outlaw anal sex, and he responded with his own opinion on the matter. If he had "opened the door" so to speak. (No "backdoor" jokes, please.)

Of course, my expectation is that a man of Justice Scalia's demonstrated intellect and wit would diffuse the entire situation with a slicing riposte, and come out looking like the victor.