During the Q&A of a recent Scalia speech at NYU, one of the law students asked "Do you sodomize your wife?" Scalia replied by saying the question is not worth answering.
Here is an attempt at justification from an email later written by the same student,
It should be clear that I intended to be offensive, obnoxious, and inflammatory. There is a time to discuss and there are times when acts and opposition are necessary. Debate is useless when one participant denies the full dignity of the other. How am I to docilely engage a man who sarcastically rants about the “beauty of homosexual relationships” (at the Q&A) and believes that gay school teachers will try to convert children to a homosexual lifestyle (at oral argument for Lawrence)?
Although my question was legally relevant, as I explain below, an independent motivation for my speech-act was to simply subject a homophobic government official to the same indignity to which he would subject millions of gay Americans. It was partially a naked act of resistance and a refusal to be silenced. I wanted to make him and everyone in the room aware of the dehumanizing effect of trivializing such an important relationship. Justice Scalia has no pity for the millions of gay Americans on whom sodomy laws and official homophobia have such an effect, so it is difficult to sympathize with his brief moment of “humiliation,” as some have called it.
I'm inclined to agree. Scalia wishes to allow the government to peer into the life of every homosexual, to investigate whether any of them has engaged in sodomy, and to jail them if they did. In doing so he transforms what is done between consenting adults in the bedroom from a private act to a public spectacle. He can hardly claim that the question isn't "worth answering" given his often-expressed desire to legally empower the police to obtain answers to the same question by force.