Do you support AFFIRMATIVE ACTION to pick the next Supreme Court Justice? (Congress, ethic)
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.
Ideally, yes, but face it, this is the real world, with a real history. "Colorblind" throughout history has been a synonym for white male, and if followed strictly, it will continue to be that way until someone deliberately seeks out a qualified candidate that doesn't fit the white male paradigm.
Um, perhaps you missed this little vote that took place back in November.
Would you want to bet that the first candidate proposed by Obama will be a Spanish speaking woman? That will be purely affirmative action and nothing else. I don't care who he appoints, I will bet that there are Spanish speaking men who could do as well as the woman he tries to get in the seat.
Actually I think he would be very likely to appoint a white woman before a black man or a white man. If that isn't affirmative action I never did understand what that crap was.
Remember, Spanish woman.
It's about representation.If the candidate is more than qualified but also happens to fill a position by race or gender ,then why is it a problem if their is a lack of representation of what is a reflection of its citizens?
Their is ONE woman on the supreme court.Women make up at least half of the population.Im sure out of those women their are some of different races and ethnicity that are more than qualified.As well as their are men from different backgrounds with stellar credentials.Does the court have to be all white men?If we get people who believe in justice and fairness thats what counts.Those who say that's that the most important thing, so we do not need Affirmative Action are totally missing the point.Then again most of those people are just making excuses so that things will always remain the same.They know exactly whats going on so they make up situations based on fear.
You'll get a stooge with affirmative action or without it. Just a stooge of a particular race, color or sex. Cream no longer rises to the top, scum does.
Their is ONE woman on the supreme court.Women make up at least half of the population.Im sure out of those women their are some of different races and ethnicity that are more than qualified.As well as their are men from different backgrounds with stellar credentials.Does the court have to be all white men?If we get people who believe in justice and fairness thats what counts.Those who say that's that the most important thing, so we do not need Affirmative Action are totally missing the point.Then again most of those people are just making excuses so that things will always remain the same.They know exactly whats going on so they make up situations based on fear.
Having people with different backgrounds, different experiences is important. And as long as people insist on focusing so intensely on Roe v. Wade I think it's vital to have more women on the SCOTUS. Roe v. Wade is considered so important that hundreds of electoral candidates base their entire campaign on this one issue. And while people of both gender have strong opinions on abortion, I think the focus on this issue means it would be wise to have a few women on the SCOTUS.
For centuries, there was a white quota. Organizations didn't hire people for their skills and talents, they hired people because they were white. Now that this practice is not allowed, suddenly incredibly capable and far more superior candidates of other races are in full view. Picking one of them doesn't mean that there's a quota or that there is this bogus concept called "reverse discrimination" or that these people are not more deserving because they are not white.
21st century now. Get caught up.
Yup. Like I said, affirmative action was great when it benefited whites only...........
I disagree. Sotomayor doesn't hold a candle--intellectually--to many of the other possible nominees. The fact that she's Latina is irrelevant to the fact that, in comparison with the other possible nominees, she's not competitive. Period. To nominate her would be a political choice on Obama's part, in order to secure the Latino vote. And that would be a travesty against the post of Supreme Court Justice itself. If there were a Latino/a candidate that was equally qualified, then fine. An Affirmative Action nomination--all other considerations being equal--would be fine with me. But that's not the case here.
OK, but let me ask you a question. Did I mention Sotomayor at all in this thread? I only pointed to the hypocrisy of those who lamented AA in the possible case of a Latina being appointed to the Court. There are others out there besides her......
Clarence Thomas was a real intellectual firebrand as well..........
I disagree. Sotomayor doesn't hold a candle--intellectually--to many of the other possible nominees.
I don't know if that's true, or what you're basing this opinion on. But more importantly, does it matter? While all qualified candidates should possess a superior intellectual ability, is being "the most intellectual" an important qualification for being a justice? Some of the greatest intellectuals in history had terrible ethics, and often a lack of common sense--they would have made horrible justices.
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.
. White men have never done anything useful in their lives ever, it's entirely race based.
