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.
How is the silence deafening when you've been linked to numerous videos and stories complaining about the very thing you're saying is being ignored? That's incredibly disingenuous on your part.
Now you know she looks past facts and ignore common sense. Just let her continue. Roland Martin should be happy that the obama hating righties has danced along to his fiddle.
Why do you assume white males have been passed over for this nomination? Do you have a copy of the 'long list' of candidates the Obama administration used and you have checked over all their qualifications side-by-side with Kagan's? Or are you just assuming there HAS to be men more qualified because....well, they're men?
No, but I would think that people actually sitting on a judicial bench would be more qualified to be supreme court justices..
We seem to have have to first for everything, I'm actually shocked he hasn't picked a black woman.
But when is there going to be a "demand" for an asian justice?
It seems that's a minority that nobody seems to demand things for.
No, but I would think that people actually sitting on a judicial bench would be more qualified to be supreme court justices..
We seem to have have to first for everything, I'm actually shocked he hasn't picked a black woman.
But when is there going to be a "demand" for an asian justice?
It seems that's a minority that nobody seems to demand things for.
There have been quite a few justices who have never sat on the bench before coming to the Supreme Court including Rehnquist, Marshall and Warren. Kagan, if confirmed, will not be the first.
Because of natural human bias. Most American's view homosexuality as an abomination. When a person puts themselves in the purview of public scrutiny, its at that point that whatever comes of it, comes of it. Homosexuality should not be exempt from that scrutiny. If she can't handle it, then she should reject the nomination.
You truly have a lot of deep seated hate inside of you, don't you??
There have been quite a few justices who have never sat on the bench before coming to the Supreme Court including Rehnquist, Marshall and Warren. Kagan, if confirmed, will not be the first.
But they had extensive legal practice experience. Kagan has been an academic for most of her years since law school.
Sure. 78% of American's are Christians. That's proof enough, no matter how watered-down the anti-religious try to portray Christianity. The truth is that homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of the Christian God. Whether a Christian chooses to side with God or side with society is between that person and God.
That is simply the dumbest thing I ever heard. You do realize that many Christians such as myself aren't bigots?? Just because you are a Christian and a bigot, doesn't mean all other, or even most other Christians are.
First, and foremost, this is a majority Christian nation. On the whole, the different sects are largely irrelevant, but if you insist on pointing out that some sects have different rules for women, then you must also acknowledge that the Christian Bible considers homosexuality a sin. There's no wiggle room in the Christian Bible on this issue. Just because you can identify a sect that, for some factually inaccurate reason, believes that homosexuality is not a sin, does not mean that it's not a sin. As I said before, the different human interpretations and variations will not escape the final judgement. Those who mislead will not escape the final judgement either. The Old Testatment defines quite clearly blasphemy and its consequences.
And then you intermingle the Bill of Rights into the equation, which does indeed guarantee freedom of religion. I, nor anyone I know, is attempting to force religion on Kagan. I believe this much is clear. However, in a majority-Christian nation, we have just as much of a right to seek out those public officials that espouse our beliefs just as much as the Atheist or homosexual does. Freedom of religion, not freedom FROM religion. When Atheists and homosexuals outnumber Christians in this nation, then it stands to reason that Christian ideals will not matter as much. But until that happens, public officials should expect to stand up to the scrutiny that the Christian majority in this nation have a right and a responsibility to project.
Clearly, there is wiggle room in the Bible on the sinfulness of homosexuality. Otherwise, you wouldn't have numerous churches that don't consider homosexuality a sin. You personally believe something, you may belong to a church that believes the same thing. While I respect that it is your belief, you live in a nation where many, many people don't share those beliefs. At some point, you have to recognize that the government has a responsibility not to reflect your beliefs, because in doing so, it would violate the rights of the many, many people who don't believe the same as you do.
No, you are not trying to force religion on Kagan. You are trying to force religion on the Supreme Court. By imposing religions standards that reflect your beliefs, but are not beliefs held by everyone in this country, or even a majority of people in this country.
And freedom of religion does include the freedom to not have a religion. As an analogy, freedom of speech, to be a true freedom, must include the freedom to be silent. If you were compelled to speak, no matter how badly you didn't want to speak, you would consider the concept of freedom of speech to be pretty flimsy. Compelling someone to do something is limiting their freedom. The freedom to believe in whatever religion you choose to believe has to include the freedom to not believe, otherwise you are compelling people to do something, and that is contradictory to the concept of freedom.
While your point about your right to seek out public officials that concur with your religions beliefs is well-taken, that doesn't mean that you have the right to demand that people reveal whether or not they concur with your beliefs. You can raise the question, but they are not required to answer. And they should not be required to answer questions that are religious in nature, in order to serve in a secular government. That would defeat the purpose of having a secular government. And the purpose of having a secular government is to ensure that you will continue to be able to believe however you choose to, and that I will also be afforded that privilege.
Nope. That's not it at all. If a homosexual is confirmed, so be it. But lets not be ridiculous by insisting that sexuality will not serve as some sort of bias in the issuance of SC rulings. Bias has existed in rulings all throughout history. It won't stop now just because a Justice is gay.
Larry Craig certainly didn't have a pro-gay rights voting record in the Senate...
Many idiotic Liberals will certainly try to overlook her poor record on diversity simply because she is being appointed by Obama, but don't pretend like everyone with leftist politics has been "mute" on the issue, because it's far from the truth.
The best thing is that many on the Right are trying to use this to call out the Left for not objecting to her less-than-liberal politics, and then they turn around and try to frame her as a "radical" Leftist. Pick a plan of attack and stick to it, please. She's a milquetoast moderate who has displayed no real political beliefs and has little experience, that's enough for me to object to her.
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.
