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

[Amanda]

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?

Why can't you answer the question? I think it's a fun topic and I've given my opinion several times, nothing dishonest about my posts. What's stopping you? Go ahead and say what's on your mind.

 

[KittenKoder]

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?

Why can't you answer the question? I think it's a fun topic and I've given my opinion several times, nothing dishonest about my posts. What's stopping you? Go ahead and say what's on your mind.

Okay, here's my question, answer mine and I'll answer yours: Are you for genocide?

 

[Amanda]

Um ... duh.

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

Why can't you answer the question? I think it's a fun topic and I've given my opinion several times, nothing dishonest about my posts. What's stopping you? Go ahead and say what's on your mind.

Okay, here's my question, answer mine and I'll answer yours: Are you for genocide?

Sorry, I asked first.

But rest assured I will answer yours if you find the guts to answer mine.

 

[JohnStOnge]

The concern is the "empathy" angle. If a homosexual Supreme Court justice is going to have a tendency to want to force people to "recognize" a perversion as normal because he or she suffers the perversion, that will be a problem. If they can put their own perversion aside and stick to the Constitution, that'd be fine.

But what are the odds of that?

 

[KittenKoder]

The concern is the "empathy" angle. If a homosexual Supreme Court justice is going to have a tendency to want to force people to recognize a perversion as normal because he or she suffers the perversion, that will be a problem. If they can put their own perversion aside and stick to the Constitution, that'd be fine.

But what are the odds of that?

This is a good example of why I support gays more.

 

[KittenKoder]

Why can't you answer the question? I think it's a fun topic and I've given my opinion several times, nothing dishonest about my posts. What's stopping you? Go ahead and say what's on your mind.

Okay, here's my question, answer mine and I'll answer yours: Are you for genocide?

Sorry, I asked first.

But rest assured I will answer yours if you find the guts to answer mine.

You didn't ask the question first, you just repeated it, your parroting skills suck. Stick to your perversions instead, at least you can get those right.

Technically, I asked mine first, since I was the first person to ask, so answer, do you support genocide?

 

[007]

Not necessarily, but many who are against gay marriage are against it because they are homophobes. And everyone who is against the idea of a gay justice is a homophobe.

Could you explain this a little more, I don't see the connection.

Give me another plausible reason that one would have a problem with a gay justice.

Because homosexuality is wrong and unnatural, and acting on those perverted urges is a bad decision, therefore a lesbian has already demonstrated their decision making process is flawed, so making them a judge is a bad idea.

 

[Sky Dancer]

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?

This is a thread about the nomination of two Supreme Court Justices who happen to be lesbian. I think it's terrific that these two women are such eminent legal scholars. Let's look at those qualifications for the job.

 

[Phoenix]

No

Agreed.

No.

 

[xotoxi]

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 am also in favor of civil unions (no more state recognized "marriage" - marriage is a religious entity). The state sanctions legal contracts between two parties. A civil union would be a legal contract between two consenting individuals.

Although I wouldn't use the term "incestuous" because that implies sex, I would be in agreement to allow two related people to join into a civil union. Father/sister, mother/son, brother/sister, two brothers. For whatever reason would benefit them (tax, property ownership, health insurance, etc.), they could be in a legally binding contract with each other in a civil union.

Just as a contract between a salaried employee and his employer is not a contract for SEX, similarly a civil union would also not be a contract for SEX. The state has no place in designing contracts for SEXUAL RELATIONS BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES. They designate contracts to legally bind two entities - and in the case of civil unions - two individuals.

 

[Sky Dancer]

This continues to be a thread about the two Supreme Court Justice nominees, and no one wants to discuss how fantastic it is that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

I'm happy for them and the country.

 

[xotoxi]

This continues to be a thread about the two Supreme Court Justice nominees, and no one wants to discuss how fantastic it is that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

I'm happy for them and the country.

I find it fantastic that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

Who are they?

 

[Sky Dancer]

This continues to be a thread about the two Supreme Court Justice nominees, and no one wants to discuss how fantastic it is that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

I'm happy for them and the country.

I find it fantastic that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

Who are they?

Kathleen Sullivan and Pam Karlan, both of Standford Law School.

 

[xotoxi]

This continues to be a thread about the two Supreme Court Justice nominees, and no one wants to discuss how fantastic it is that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

I'm happy for them and the country.

I find it fantastic that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

Who are they?

Kathleen Sullivan and Pam Karlan, both of Standford Law School.

Are they each other's partners?

 

[Sky Dancer]

I find it fantastic that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

Who are they?

Kathleen Sullivan and Pam Karlan, both of Standford Law School.

Are they each other's partners?

I don't know. What makes you think so?

 

[del]

This continues to be a thread about the two Supreme Court Justice nominees, and no one wants to discuss how fantastic it is that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

I'm happy for them and the country.

I find it fantastic that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

Who are they?

they're two fantastic lesbians. pay attention.

 

[xotoxi]

Kathleen Sullivan and Pam Karlan, both of Standford Law School.

Are they each other's partners?

I don't know. What makes you think so?

The fact that they went to the same law school makes is a slight possibility.

 

[Phoenix]

This continues to be a thread about the two Supreme Court Justice nominees, and no one wants to discuss how fantastic it is that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

I'm happy for them and the country.

I find it fantastic that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

Who are they?

they're two fantastic lesbians. pay attention.

Why does it have to be about them being lesbians?

If they were hetero males would they garner the same attention?

would we find it fantastic that two straight persons (of either gender) have risen, etc. ...

Focusing on their sexual preferences belittles their apparent capabilities, IMO. Like they're the token lesbians in the pool.

 

[del]

I find it fantastic that two lesbians have risen to be held in such esteem to be candidates for such a high honor.

Who are they?

they're two fantastic lesbians. pay attention.

Why does it have to be about them being lesbians?

If they were hetero males would they garner the same attention?

would we find it fantastic that two straight persons (of either gender) have risen, etc. ...

Focusing on their sexual preferences belittles their apparent capabilities, IMO. Like they're the token lesbians in the pool.

that's because that's what they are.
*shrug*

personally, i don't find it that fantastic.

 

[Phoenix]

Why does it have to be about them being lesbians?

If they were hetero males would they garner the same attention?

would we find it fantastic that two straight persons (of either gender) have risen, etc. ...

Focusing on their sexual preferences belittles their apparent capabilities, IMO. Like they're the token lesbians in the pool.

that's because that's what they are.
*shrug*

personally, i don't find it that fantastic.

me neither

In fact, I would find it irritating and somewhat disturbing to be constantly labeled by my choice of sexual partners, as opposed to ... oh, say my ability to do my job well, or something like that.