Is America ready for a openly gay Supreme Court justice?"

Perhaps this:


Or maybe this:


Or maybe this



So. Gonna stop bullshitting anytime soon?

It would be nice if you learned how to attribute a quote. I recognize Mani and Jillian's quotes. I don't remember seeing the other 1 so I don't know where it comes from.

I had already stated that Manifold and Jillian had stated support. Its not my fault if you have memory issues.



You another moron who can't differentiate subtle differences?

Here's 1 of my thoughts (I'll give you something to attack so you can ignore everything else :) ) on the subject: I don't have any problem with diversity on the supreme court, however I think it should be proportionate to the people they are presiding over. For example, I think roughly half should be women because women are roughly half of the population. According to 1 source I looked up the census bureau projected the black population at 12% for 2008, so clearly there should be at least 1 black justice. I think a criteria that represents the population of the people would be fair. Do we have enough homosexuals in this country to warrant representation? I don't know, but that is how I would begin to look at the question.

So I did.

The SCOTUS is comprised of 9 justices, thus if evenly divided each should represent about 11% of the people.

According to Gary Gates a Senior Research Fellow at The Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy, a think tank dedicated to the field of sexual orientation law and public policy the 1-in-10 number for LGBTs isn't entirely accurate. Here's what he says:

Gary Gates said:
That's the single question that I'm asked the most. The answer is unfortunately not simple. I'll respond with a question. What do you mean when you use the word 'gay'? If you mean people who identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual in a survey, then the answer is that it's likely not one in ten, but closer to one in twenty. A recent government survey found that 4 percent of adults aged 18-45 identified as 'homosexual' or 'bisexual.' A similar proportion of voters identify as GLB. If you define gay as having same-sex attractions or behaviors, you do get higher proportions that are a bit closer to the one in ten figure."

(Interview with Gary Gates of The Williams Institute)

There ya go, an expert doesn't think it's quite 1 in 10 that are gay. To meet my criteria they could have needed to have at least 11% to warrant inclusion.

See? That was easy. I don't know why you guys could pony up a decent response, that wasn't hard at all. :)

Congratulations. You managed to find a reason thats not homophobic. Of course its so incredibly stupid that nobody would actually believe that, but you did find one. Kudos on a job poorly done.

There are a couple different posting styles here. It seems like you're trying to fit the troll mold. You've got a lot of work to do if you're going to measure up. I probably won't be bothering with you anymore tho, I like a little more substance than you seem to be able to provide. Have fun. :)
 
man is obama playing games with the populace or what....

we need to apoint justices that are common people (unqualified)....

and they toss in a couple of gay law clerks and the fedding frenzy kicks into high gear....
 
With shit like this, conservatives can no longer claim that their opposition to hate crime laws and gay marriage are based on "tradition" or other bullshit. Its simply because they don't like gays, and opposition to appointing a gay supreme court justice is bigotry, clear and simple.

shows what you dont know Nik....i work with 2 pretty liberal people who are not comfortable with gayness...as usual your way off base
 
With shit like this, conservatives can no longer claim that their opposition to hate crime laws and gay marriage are based on "tradition" or other bullshit. Its simply because they don't like gays, and opposition to appointing a gay supreme court justice is bigotry, clear and simple.

shows what you dont know Nik....i work with 2 pretty liberal people who are not comfortable with gayness...as usual your way off base

Now that you mention it Harry, I've known more libs that were actually homophobic than cans, even tho the cons were generally more honest about their reservations.
 
Let's try this:

If you have two Supreme Court Justice nominees with all things being constant between them save one is a homosexual and the other is a heterosexual would you support one of the other? If so, why?

If both were equally qualified, a coin flip. But no matter the result someone would complain. If the gay one got it, the "all gays are bad" crowd would whine that it's preferential treatment for being gay, if the straight one got it then the ACLU would be on it in a heartbeat. No win situation.
 
Let's try this:

If you have two Supreme Court Justice nominees with all things being constant between them save one is a homosexual and the other is a heterosexual would you support one of the other? If so, why?

If both were equally qualified, a coin flip. But no matter the result someone would complain. If the gay one got it, the "all gays are bad" crowd would whine that it's preferential treatment for being gay, if the straight one got it then the ACLU would be on it in a heartbeat. No win situation.

Oh please KK, no one cares when someone straight or white gets overlooked.
 
And everyone who is against the idea of a gay justice is a homophobe.

what if you just dont happen to like their views on things Nik,does that count?...you are using the same BS that some were saying if you dont vote for Obama your a bigot....your a narrow minded person Nik....seeing that more and more in your replies....
 
Let's try this:

If you have two Supreme Court Justice nominees with all things being constant between them save one is a homosexual and the other is a heterosexual would you support one of the other? If so, why?

If both were equally qualified, a coin flip. But no matter the result someone would complain. If the gay one got it, the "all gays are bad" crowd would whine that it's preferential treatment for being gay, if the straight one got it then the ACLU would be on it in a heartbeat. No win situation.

Oh please KK, no one cares when someone straight or white gets overlooked.

Heard enough whining from you to know that they do.
 
oh please... cause there's such a history of discrimination against straight white people

she should really get a grip....

but isn't it beautiful to see how full of love it is....

I know, her posts are so dripping with love I gotta get the bleach.
 
Soon the USSC will be stacked with homosexuals and perverts. All they need now is a "junkie". Good luck trying to ban abortion.........
You plan on applying?

why...are you the chapter president?

why can't you answer the questions about what is really a homophobe? why do you run away from tough discussions?

do you support a father and daugher marrying? would you support a father who married his daughter and now has kids with her, for a justice position on the united states supreme court?
Answered. I guess you only read what you want to read.
 
If both were equally qualified, a coin flip. But no matter the result someone would complain. If the gay one got it, the "all gays are bad" crowd would whine that it's preferential treatment for being gay, if the straight one got it then the ACLU would be on it in a heartbeat. No win situation.

Oh please KK, no one cares when someone straight or white gets overlooked.

Heard enough whining from you to know that they do.

Link please :)
 
You plan on applying?

why...are you the chapter president?

why can't you answer the questions about what is really a homophobe? why do you run away from tough discussions?

do you support a father and daugher marrying? would you support a father who married his daughter and now has kids with her, for a justice position on the united states supreme court?
Answered. I guess you only read what you want to read.

They are also reading more into what is posted in failed attempts to make a point with a non-issue. Sad that the anti-gay group has degraded so far.
 
let me ask you this...

if someone supports the homosexual over the hetrosexual, are they hetrophobe?

It's a possibility.

Do you have a response to the question(s) I asked?

fair enough....

Let's try this:

If you have two Supreme Court Justice nominees with all things being constant between them save one is a homosexual and the other is a heterosexual would you support one of (sic) the other? If so, why?

the homosexual.

this country is about man made laws. there is a struggle between those who believe that since the founding fathers were christian (mostly) and the foundations of this country are in fact rooted in christianity (some say christo-judiasm or whatever, same thing) that when america speaks in a christian voice, it is not "establishing" christianity becuase christianity establisthed this country,.

they have a strong point. then there is the first amendment. what to make of that....oh boy. on its face, it says that america shall not establish a religion....or establish a religion over another. you and i could probably write reviews back and forth on this....but you get the point.

i'm for the homosexual because there is no reason that a homosexual should be outlawed from serving on the bench, according to our constitution. black people have been put on the bench solely for being black, women are NOW still being talked about being put on the bench for merely being women....i disagree with that train of thought. it is illogical. the constitution does not mandate that the scotus be a cross section of any community.

why i would like to see a "open" homosexual on the bench, because it has not been done. because if this country truly stands on "no establishment" of religion, then it should not matter if you are gay. as if anyone knows the "closet" activities of all our justices....

with that said, so far, in this country, the gay issue is a religious issue. once upon a time in the early part of last century, it was MORE than a religious issue...but that is another thread

Thanks for the candid answer, yurt.

I, too, would choose the homosexual purely because it hasn't been done before. I dig those kind of things.
 
why...are you the chapter president?

why can't you answer the questions about what is really a homophobe? why do you run away from tough discussions?

do you support a father and daugher marrying? would you support a father who married his daughter and now has kids with her, for a justice position on the united states supreme court?
Answered. I guess you only read what you want to read.

They are also reading more into what is posted in failed attempts to make a point with a non-issue. Sad that the anti-gay group has degraded so far.

I'm sure it's not a non-issue to incestuous couples that are denied the rights that others get. What's your take on incestuous marriage, KK, I don't think I've seen your answer. :)
 
Answered. I guess you only read what you want to read.

They are also reading more into what is posted in failed attempts to make a point with a non-issue. Sad that the anti-gay group has degraded so far.

I'm sure it's not a non-issue to incestuous couples that are denied the rights that others get. What's your take on incestuous marriage, KK, I don't think I've seen your answer. :)

Straight people are more likely to commit incest, and since you want to black and white it, one man and one woman is still father and daughter, so the black and white rule does not stop it at all. So, by your logic, hetero marriage is actually what runs the risk, not gay. So try again.
 
They are also reading more into what is posted in failed attempts to make a point with a non-issue. Sad that the anti-gay group has degraded so far.

I'm sure it's not a non-issue to incestuous couples that are denied the rights that others get. What's your take on incestuous marriage, KK, I don't think I've seen your answer. :)

Straight people are more likely to commit incest, and since you want to black and white it, one man and one woman is still father and daughter, so the black and white rule does not stop it at all. So, by your logic, hetero marriage is actually what runs the risk, not gay. So try again.

I'm sorry, I didn't see YOUR answer, are you for or against consenting incestuous marriage?
 
I'm sure it's not a non-issue to incestuous couples that are denied the rights that others get. What's your take on incestuous marriage, KK, I don't think I've seen your answer. :)

Straight people are more likely to commit incest, and since you want to black and white it, one man and one woman is still father and daughter, so the black and white rule does not stop it at all. So, by your logic, hetero marriage is actually what runs the risk, not gay. So try again.

I'm sorry, I didn't see YOUR answer, are you for or against consenting incestuous marriage?

Yep, thus since incest is between one man and one woman, straight sex should be illegal.
 
Straight people are more likely to commit incest, and since you want to black and white it, one man and one woman is still father and daughter, so the black and white rule does not stop it at all. So, by your logic, hetero marriage is actually what runs the risk, not gay. So try again.

I'm sorry, I didn't see YOUR answer, are you for or against consenting incestuous marriage?

Yep, thus since incest is between one man and one woman, straight sex should be illegal.

You're disappointing me, KK. Why can't you answer the question? I did. I'm in favor of incestuous civil unions. It's only fair and I'm all about the equality. And I'm not even joking, if we're going to give the "consenting adult" argument credence, I have to be in favor of it, because I'm not a hypocrite. Where do you stand?
 
I'm sorry, I didn't see YOUR answer, are you for or against consenting incestuous marriage?

Yep, thus since incest is between one man and one woman, straight sex should be illegal.

You're disappointing me, KK. Why can't you answer the question? I did. I'm in favor of incestuous civil unions. It's only fair and I'm all about the equality. And I'm not even joking, if we're going to give the "consenting adult" argument credence, I have to be in favor of it, because I'm not a hypocrite. Where do you stand?

Um ... duh.

It is you who are being dishonest and parroting this weeks catch phrase. Try something new, hhmkay? :eusa_hand:
 

Forum List

Back
Top