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, personally, support anyone, including SC justices, in joining whatever exclusive club (men's only, women's only, blacks only, whites only, Christians only, Jews only, Muslims only) they wish. It is the right of assembly. I'm afraid that "righteous" clamoring against these will prompt an activist Supreme Court to declare such clubs illegal.
This is the truly scary alternative, and it's just not right to carp about them.
if she liked the club she should stay in it, why should she people please to win a vote, she should be her own person and let the chips fall where they may.
if she liked the club she should stay in it, why should she people please to win a vote, she should be her own person and let the chips fall where they may.
Well, yeah, she should stay in that club if she really wanted to since the former woman justice was also a member of that female club. I really think that Rahm and David were afraid their appointee would stumble over the club and it would cost her her seat.
Being a sexist isn't considered by many to be wrong for a woman but I do think that many really do dislike men for the same thing.
It's called grooming ones self before being appointed protector of the realm.
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.