On the surface, the looming concerns of this week's confirmation hearings for Judge Samuel Alito Jr. to the U.S. Supreme Court have been abortion and domestic spying. But while gay specific issues got virtually no overt notice during the first days of Alito's hearings, there were specific implications for gays in the discourse on both abortion and spying. Furthermore, right-wing conservatives from political arenas outside the hearing made clear that they consider opposition to gay marriage a big part of the reason they're supporting Alito.

Only two senators – Charles Schumer (D-New York) and Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) – acknowledged a gay specific case in the first two days of the hearing. Both referred to the 1985 Bowers v. Hardwick decision, upholding sodomy laws, and the 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned Bowers. But neither asked Alito a question concerning the cases.

The eight Democrats on the 18-member judiciary committee came out swinging hard questions at Alito during the first days of the hearing. Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) did not mention last month's revelation, by NBC News, that the Pentagon has been monitoring protests – including those by gay groups – against military recruiters, but he did express concern about more widely publicized revelations that President Bush has authorized spying on Americans without a court order, purportedly as part of his antiterrorist efforts. He criticized Alito's record, which he said "shows time and again that you have been overly deferential to executive power, whether exercised by the president, the attorney general, or law enforcement officials."

Referring to a job application Alito submitted to the Reagan administration in 1985, Senator Herb Kohl (D-Wisconsin) pointed out that Alito stated that he believes "very strongly" in the "legitimacy of a government role in protecting traditional values."

"What traditional values were you referring to?" asked Kohl, during the first round of questioning on Tuesday, January 10. "And who decides what is a, quote, 'traditional value'?"

"I think a traditional value that I probably had in mind [in 1985] was the ability to live in peace and safety in your neighborhood," replied Alito. "...I think the ability of people to raise a family and raise their children in accordance with their own beliefs is a traditional value. I think the ability to raise children in a way that they're not only subjected to – they're spared physical threats, but also psychological threats that can come from elements in the atmosphere, is a traditional value. I think that the ability to practice your own conscience is a traditional value."

Questions from Republicans were the most successful in teasing out Alito's thoughts on abortion-related issues. Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania), chairman of the judiciary committee, asked Alito at the top of Tuesday's hearing about key cases upholding the right to privacy. Alito quickly responded that, "I do agree that the Constitution protects a right to privacy."

"People have a right to privacy in their homes and in their papers and in their persons," said Alito. In response to questions from Specter, Alito said he agreed with the decisions in the 1965 case of Griswald v. Connecticut, which said married couples had a right to privacy that enabled them to choose whether to use contraception and the 1972 decision in Eisenstadt v. Baird , that extended that same right to privacy to single people.

Eisenstadt and Griswald led to the 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, upholding a woman's right to abortion, and Roe v. Wade laid groundwork, which, 30 years later, led to Lawrence v. Texas . That connection – and the alliance between supporters of a woman's right to have an abortion and the effort of gays to achieve equal rights – was not lost on conservatives inside or outside the Senate hearing room.

Senator Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), during his opening statement on Monday, complained that the Supreme Court had ruled that women have a constitutional right to abortion but not assisted suicide and "that we have sodomy protected under that due process but prostitution unprotected?"

Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) said that many "liberal special interest groups and their allies [are] devoting so much time and so much money to defeat [Alito's] nomination" because "they want judges who will impose their liberal agenda on the American people; views so liberal that they cannot prevail at the ballot box."

"They want judges who will find traditional marriage limited to one man and one woman unconstitutional," said Cornyn, in his opening statement Monday.

Right-wing supporters outside the hearing room also made prominent mention of their concern – and expectation – that the next Supreme Court justice oppose same-sex marriage.

The Chicago Tribune reported that a number of attendees to last weekend's "Justice Sunday III" rally – a nationally broadcast event in Philadelphia in support of Alito, sponsored by the right-wing Family Research Council – said their pastors had told them the Alito fight was largely over abortion and gay marriage. Several speakers at that rally focused on their opposition to same-sex marriage. And in a column Monday, conservative columnist Charles Colson put it most bluntly, saying that "The principle set forth in Roe v. Wade – individual autonomy over not only one's body but also the meaning of life itself – is the foundation for 'gay' rights and same-sex 'marriage' today."

Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and other national gay organizations are opposing Alito's confirmation. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) said she is troubled by Alito's statement that Roe should be overturned but, during questioning on Tuesday, she could not pin him down on whether he would uphold that precedent.

Senators were set to finish up the first round of questioning on Wednesday, complete a second round, and then hear from outside witnesses on Thursday. The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on the nomination January 17 and the full Senate on January 20.