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.
Larry Craig certainly didn't have a pro-gay rights voting record in the Senate...
Indeed. And the Republican State Senator from California who was recently discovered to be gay had a solidly anti-gay voting record.
Vaughn Walker (the judge presiding over the Prop. 8 trial) is gay, but he has been harshly criticized by gay groups in the past for making decisions that didn't favor the "gay side".
It's really ironic that conservatives want to discuss Kagan's sexual orientation because they're usually the first ones to say that personal characteristics shouldn't matter. Now, all of a sudden, they do matter?
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.
A FEW honest liberals have come out. I don't see civil rights orgs, ACLU, NOW or many other liberals complaining much.
Even with those few, there is not the firestorm we would see from the media and the Left if this had been a republican nominee.
(1) He gets a liberal on the court. That's an obvious one
But I think, that he deliberately picked her, because he knows that the far right will hate her, because she's Jewish and a lesbian. And the Far left, being also anti Semitic and Anti Israel, and their concern with the far right about there being "too much Jewish influence".... So basically, there will be more hatred towards Jews, and then Obama can justify anti Israel policies.
Get people to be mad at Jews, you can punish Israel. Yet still have a liberal who otherwise supports your agenda..
and why would the far right hate her for either of those reasons? My son in law is Jewish and is as far right as they come, my grandson in law is Hispanic and even at 25 is pretty far right.
Now, that my husband and I have both finished laughing at your reasoning I think I will see what a few others have to say on the subject.
I believe there is a methodl behind his madness (expression only, I don't think he is mad) but I don't think it has anything to do with what you are saying. I think he did it because he figures she is a friend from way back and will go along with anything he wants.
I'm shocked speechless that anyone can put such a racist, anti-Semitic and erroneous spin on this Supreme Court nomination. I'm also shocked speechless that anyone can make such an erroneous blanket statement that all liberals are anti-Semitic.
Maybe the first time I ever agreed with you on anything. His/her statements are just plain out of wack!!!!
GregW, I doubt her being Jewish will change much on the court. When she is confirmed the court will be made up of 6 Catholics and 3 Jews, and the political balance isn't going to change one bit. As for her being a lesbian, this too is getting tiring, what will that have to do with the overall makeup and voting of the court?
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.
As I stated before, you either believe the Word of God, or you don't. I didn't say that I hate the individual. I have never once said that I hated the individual. I have stated clearly that I disagree with homosexuality and that the Bible disagrees with homosexuality. You may pick and choose what you want to believe and what you don't want to believe, but you'll not escape judgement for deciding that secular society trumps God's word. You, as a professed Christian, should know this. Referring to me as a bigot, and professing to be cleaner in heart and soul because you presumably agree with homosexuality does not relieve you of this reality.
Precisely, although I am biased towards all straight Justices, not just white and not just male. Which is exactly my argument. The homosexuals on this forum seem to believe that they can convince everyone, including themselves, that there will be no bias just because a Justice is gay. This is total, and complete, nonsense. A gay justice will have just as much bias towards sexuality-based laws and legislation as did a white male Justice did in the days of slavery. Legal interpretation many times will be bent to fit society's will. There is no such thing as unbiased legal interpretation. Those who believe differently are not living in reality, nor do they have any knowledge of historical context.
So, assuming then that for the last more or less 225 years all Supreme Court justices have been straight, they've been skewing the law in favor of straight people and you prefer it that way. At least you're being honest.
IMHO, a good SC justice works hard to make sure his or her membership in a race, group or class affect does not affect his or her judgment. History has shown that to be true or the outcome in Brown v. Board of Education and a thousand other cases would have been different. Personal opinions and the social climate of the times are going to have an effect, but the better the justice, the less the effect.
The question should be "Will Elena Kagen make a good justice?" and not "Is Elena Kagen gay?"
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.
