Hey Mark here's the perfect job for you. š¤£ The headline is all you need to read... of course you may already have a job like that.
Jackson confirmation hearings
- Thread starter UncleMark
- Start date
Black has nothing to do with it. Itās the completely ignorant 100 plus genders issue. She knows what the hell a woman is. Answer the damn question. Sheās smart enough that she could have answered without offending the nuts she has to pander to.Really pushed a button with you, Randy. I'm not sure why you react so strongly to a smart, qualified, black, female nominee. It's a wonder!
BTW thanks for addressing me as Randy. Stop in sometime if youāre in Southern Indiana.
I think the only reason Gorsuch didn't get more was in protest of the sidelining of Garland.
Agree on Kavanaugh regarding the process. I am of course NAL
We'll see with Barrett. Outlawing abortion is a political loser for Republicans. If that gets pushed to Congress it could get ugly.
Kavanaugh is a sexual predator. Of course that didnāt disqualify Trump or Thomas. If Kavanaugh was the only conceivable candidate that Trump couldāve put forward then conservative reluctance to hold the moral high ground would be understandable. As it is, conservatives lost all conceivable moral standing.
Note I am pro-life and pro-conservative majority in the Supreme Court.
Note I am pro-life and pro-conservative majority in the Supreme Court.
Or Biden or Clinton or Ted Kennedy... could go on and on.
Don't know if it's still true or not but several years ago I read an article that said the USA was the only country where abortion was made legal by the judicial branch of the government rather than the legislative. While I am pro life I would feel better about it if it was passed by the legislature rather that having some court say it when it's not mentioned anywhere in the constitution.
There is a condition, AIS, where the body is at least partially unable to process testosterone. If fully unable to process, a baby will have female sex organs even if they are xy chromosome.
Yes, it is rare. But somewhere between 1 in25,000 and 1 in 65,000 male births have it. So it is not impossible a case involving someone born xy but believed to be a female and raised as a female would come before the Supreme Court in the next 25 years.
If she gave an answer, wouldn't she almost be guaranteed of recusing herself in such a case?
The role of gender, the role of sexual identity, is in flux. It would be stupid to commit. 75 years ago a justice could easily have been appointed saying that there was a difference between Blacks and Whites in intelligence and that the races should not mingle. But race was about to become in flux and that idea went into the trash bin of history. I have no idea how humans in 20 years, or 100 years, will view gender. The only thing I am sure of is none of you know either.
Is a person with xy chromosomes born with AIS and exhibiting female genitalia and raised as a female a female or a male?
Yes, it is rare. But somewhere between 1 in25,000 and 1 in 65,000 male births have it. So it is not impossible a case involving someone born xy but believed to be a female and raised as a female would come before the Supreme Court in the next 25 years.
If she gave an answer, wouldn't she almost be guaranteed of recusing herself in such a case?
The role of gender, the role of sexual identity, is in flux. It would be stupid to commit. 75 years ago a justice could easily have been appointed saying that there was a difference between Blacks and Whites in intelligence and that the races should not mingle. But race was about to become in flux and that idea went into the trash bin of history. I have no idea how humans in 20 years, or 100 years, will view gender. The only thing I am sure of is none of you know either.
Is a person with xy chromosomes born with AIS and exhibiting female genitalia and raised as a female a female or a male?
This is an interesting example and I think it helps clarify the issue. I see it as a 2 x 2 matrix with four situations. One axis has private and public and the other axis has psychological and physical.
Traditionally sex has been divided into male and female based on the physical role a person plays in reproduction. Ultimately thatās also a private matter between the two partners involved.
Psychologically, sexual identity is a private matter. Science has no way of determining an individualās psychological/sexual identity, thus there is no way to define any legal proposition about an individualās sexual identity that isnāt arbitrary.
Lia Thomas is a case where the physical attributes become a public matter, that is, competition with other people with the same or different physical attributes. As a public matter, fairness dictates some sort of legislation.
Any psychological cases that involve the public domain would likewise require governance or legislation to ensure fairness. Public bathrooms, for example.
Do you equate subjective, and often shifting, sexual identity with objective biology?
When a lawyer tries a case for sexual discrimination in pay, part of the proof must now be the sexual identifies of the parties?
I wondered when this would come up. It's a good point. Jackson was correct in hinting that defining gender is a messy business. Do we go by assigned gender at birth? By chromosomes? By genital expression? Puberty? Some combination of the four? What do we do when trying to do so doesn't result in a clear answer?
In the vast majority of cases, that won't be a problem. Most people are either born XY with male genitals, assigned male at birth, and experience male puberty OR are born XX with female genitals, assigned female at birth, and experience female puberty.
But most isn't all. Some people stubbornly won't fit in either paradigm.
No. Is my matrix unclear? What you are calling subjective I am calling psychological, right?
āWhen a lawyer tries a case for sexual discrimination in pay, part of the proof must now be the sexual identifies of the parties?ā
You tell me. Doesnāt my 2x2 matrix resolve that? For example, you are talking about psychological/sexual identity in the public realm. Fairness dictates legislation. I think my matrix leads to the ultimate conclusion that no individual can be discriminated against arbitrarily. āSexualā discrimination becomes unnecessary as a category.
Take one guess why they lacked Dem support. Could it be because it came after McConnell stole Obama's pick. Also, for the Coney-Barrett pick McConnell goes against his new precedent or reason of not picking a justice during election year by holding a vote just weeks before the election.
Defining sex is not a messy business. Believing that sex is assigned at birth is the problem.
Yeah, there are outliers, but you donāt disrupt a huge body of law, not to mention culture, for black swans.
Oh no. Iām with you. But Iām hoping this confirmation starts a trajectory back to more normal SC confirmations.
A deal breaker? Give me a break. It was a complete trap question that would give people a reason to label her no matter how she answered. She was smart enough to side step that question which I give her alot of credit for. About every answer Comey-Barrett gave or didn't give was similar to the one Jackson gave.
Where do people get this āalotā thing? Autocorrect makes it a pain to type because it is not a word. People, youāre looking for āa lot!ā
It seems the same people think itās āwould of,ā āshould ofā and ācould of.ā Replace āofā with āhaveā and theyāre typing intelligently.
Iāve tried to help and some people continue to post the same way. Come on, people. š
I didn't say defining sex is messy business. I said defining gender is. And gender is assigned at birth. The doctor and parents decide what gender a baby is and type it up on the birth certificate.
That said, defining sex might be messy, too, for some of the reasons I already mentioned.
The Trump cult is something to behold. Itās a mystery how they can believe so many things that are obviously not so.
Not biting on that. š
I don't know whether to laugh at this or hunt you down and murder you.
Wow, I would have thought you could care less about it.
You're on the list.Hunt down and murder you.
First you is extraneous. Weak style.
