Xoe's Supreme Court pick can't tell you what a woman is because she's 'not a biologist ' (radical, carry)
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.
I don't like KBJ's nomination, but I stand by the fact that the question was the stealth maneuver, not KBJ's response. Why ask it in the first place? The answer is self-evident; no one asks such a dumb question after the age of three or so.
Well, A and B.
A: Clinton was directly quoted to me that that was quibbling, of what not to do.
B: We have had years of politicians dictating reproductive rights who didn't have much of a clue of biology. Now we are about to have a high official to decide law who doesn't understand biology, either? That does not thrill me.
Most people on this forum who are denigrating Judge Jackson do not have the temperament to have made it through that process without getting thrown out or arrested lol.
She's more than qualified, and Lindsey Graham knows that. His attempt to paint her as an activist judge is partisan crap. She would be a great addition to the Supreme Court.
It is funny, that those who scoff the loudest at the thought that defining a woman isn't as straight forward as they thought, are having a hard time with agreeing on a definition of a woman.
Not as funny as you ducking and dodging every poster who was able to define what a woman is, including my own post.
Trolling? Really I mention a scientific fact based upon the issues in this thread and you can't handle it so now I'm trolling. Funny! By the way - that violates the TOS. Try to stick to the issues. It's better to move on if you can't refute the point.
You had no point. So there was nothing to refute. You cited rare biological anomalies. So what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC
It is funny, that those who scoff the loudest at the thought that defining a woman isn't as straight forward as they thought, are having a hard time with agreeing on a definition of a woman.
Say, Clara, do you define yourself as a woman, man, hermaphrodite, a southern brown tree frog, a kit fox, a saddleback seal, or something different? After all, it is very hard to define and distinguish these. Especially in the clown world we now inhabit.
Did you notice that the post I replied to would include my dog, as the poster didn't EVEN bother to add the word "human"?
And most posts don't note "adult". Rather, it's a listing of genitals.
Which, when removed, I guess the person is no longer a woman?
(Oh well you know what they meaannnnnntt isn't sufficient, when you're trying to arrive at a working definition. And yes, there are people who fully believe that a completed transgender is actually the sex they switched to. So a definition needs to be made, legally).
Doesn’t the male part to be removed to be considered a woman, as well as having breast and female hormone levels…right now it seems if someone identifies as a woman, they are considered a female. Not sure who has set that criteria.
A mutilated man is still not an adult female. but, if a man goes thru all the surgeries to remove his male parts, and the medical treatments, acts as a woman, and he wants to be addressed as a woman, I will publicly refer to him as 'her,' but he's still not an actual woman, should not be competing in women's sporting events or deserve 'woman of the year' awards, etc...
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.