Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why should it? Should "tell me about your sexual preferences" going to be a standard job interview topic for us all now? Because if it is I think I might barf.
This is anything BUT a "standard" job interview. The post she is in line for will have more lasting implications than anything the POTUS does in his tenure. Her position is for life while the president has a term of four years. I guarantee that if Obama or Bush were gay, their sexual orientation would have been at the forefront of their election.
This is anything BUT a "standard" job interview. The post she is in line for will have more lasting implications than anything the POTUS does in his tenure. Her position is for life while the president has a term of four years. I guarantee that if Obama or Bush were gay, their sexual orientation would have been at the forefront of their election.
Of the 111 judges who have served on the Supreme Court, 108 have been white, 108 have been male, and zero have been identified as anything other than heterosexual. But somehow, race and gender only spark concern when a judge like Sonia Sotomayor is nominated; a justice’s sexual orientation will only irrevocably affect American history when she just might not be straight.
Andrew Sullivan says that it would be better to be open and let the chips fall where they may, because "[Obama] has, after all, told us that one of his criteria for a Supreme Court Justice is knowing what it feels like to be on the wrong side of legal discrimination."
What exactly do you want them to ask her? "How will your sexual orientation affect your decisions?"
It's a good start. Honestly UM, if it was a Republican president nominating an uber conservative, liberals would be shredding these boards with only God knows what kinds of insults.
It's all politics. It goes both ways. I understand that it is your duty to uphold and defend the gay lifestyle. I would do the same if it was something I was passionate about. But do you really believe that this topic should be off limits, considering the level of the post she is nominated for?
It's a good start. Honestly UM, if it was a Republican president nominating an uber conservative, liberals would be shredding these boards with only God knows what kinds of insults.
It's all politics. It goes both ways. I understand that it is your duty to uphold and defend the gay lifestyle. I would do the same if it was something I was passionate about. But do you really believe that this topic should be off limits, considering the level of the post she is nominated for?
As far as the level of post she is nominated for why should her sexual orientation even be an issue?? I just don't see how something like that has even remote relevance \.
The American Family Foundation doesn't give a hoot about the family. If they did, they would work on child abuse, husband and wife abuse, elder abuse and adultry. Instead, they are just spewing off their prejudice, ignorance and stupidity.
Justice Kagan will rule from the bench not her bedroom. Another woman moving upward.
Well said. I care about her knowledge of the law and the constitution. You never really know what someone does behind closed doors anyway, and it's none of my business.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
