One further point that I wanted to mention, which should be somewhat evident, but wasn't clearly stated:
If the above explanation with regard to sexual perversion seems reasonable and logical to one, there is something else that follows as an extension of it .....
But first, I want to address the matter the words pervert (a verb, as in "to pervert") and perversion a little further.
Unfortunately, due to their association with matters of a sexual nature, these words have acquired a lot of baggage as a consequence of various ethical, moral, or religious beliefs or positions that people hold, and perhaps conduct they have engaged in (or not)
Indeed, the use of both words today, outside of a sexual context, is fairly rare - which is somewhat of an odd thing - because the words themselves express a concept which isn't necessarily exclusively sexual.
That this is so (acquisition of baggage), is, perhaps, a testament to the degree which the subject of sex engenders a large amount of emotion and "think" (some of it sane, some of it much less so) for many. For most, particularly in the US, sex itself is a fairly taboo subject - something one doesn't generally discuss trivially in polite company - this is because of it's highly personal and intimate nature, and other social factors.
At any rate ....... the words pervert and perversion at their basic, imply things which the definitions I cited above illustrate (distortion, alteration, misuse, etc.)
Since we are talking about the selection of a Supreme Court Justice (or any judge for that matter), the issues of fidelity and adherence to the law as written and intended, the Framer's original intent and strict construction with regard to the Constitution, and the like are indeed very relevant ..... because the inclination and resulting conduct on the part of any nominee with regard to these things potentially affects the rights and liberties of many.
Any individual's inclination, propensity, and proclivity to adhere to such things without interpreting incorrectly, misconstruing, distorting, or altering them, is a bonafide and entirely valid issue for discussion.
And I would submit that someone who is inclined to pervert things in one area of Life, might well be prone to do it in another (although that isn't necessarily a given, by any means)
Of course, if one subscribes to the view that a person's sexual orientation is a genetic matter (a premise that is by no means scientifically proven), and that such conduct is not a matter of choosing of one's own volition and free will (regardless of whether there might be certain factors that do indeed incline a person in a certain direction), then the premise immediately above will not have much merit, or carry much weight, for you personally.
Understand, that the above sentiments are not targeted specifically at homosexuals (or bisexuals .... or whatever sexuals ....) to the exclusion of heterosexuals - I would just as easily have similar concerns about a heterosexual who was inclined to some other form of sexual perversion (and there are, most assuredly, many)