Thursday at noon, Justice Beyer steps down officially. We'll have the first ever USSC Justice who does not know what a woman is

[pknopp]

Jesus spoke of the money changers and of those who sinned also. Repeating the same thing over and over is not an option. A woman having several abortions is just a slut. a man abusing others repeatedly and not paying for his responsibilities is a criminal.

How many times has Trump been sued and had to pay out for fraud? Maybe we need to start at the top?

BTW, I'm not going to take any Christian teaching from someone like yourself.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Luckily she's just taking the place of another lib, and not an additional lib.

 

[22lcidw]

How many times has Trump been sued and had to pay out for fraud? Maybe we need to start at the top?

BTW, I'm not going to take any Christian teaching from someone like yourself.

You don't understand. I am bringing it up. Not enough of that on the forum as it is part of the thinking like all other views. Trump has done more for Christians then self-professed Christians like Pelosi and Biden. Hell, they would be welcoming them at the cattle cars to the death camps.

 

[22lcidw]

You don't understand. I am bringing it up. Not enough of that on the forum as it is part of the thinking like all other views. Trump has done more for Christians then self-professed Christians like Pelosi and Biden. Hell, they would be welcoming them at the cattle cars to the death camps.

Progs have used Jesus to get us to a nation in decline. Who know, maybe the Repubs will add more Supreme Court justices. And I would rubber stamp the most conservative ones quickly if they have any.

 

[marvin martian]

My question is will her new colleagues explain to her what the definition of "woman" is? Will she convince them that the definition is unknowable?

Will she be given an extra staff budget to hire a biologist along with her legal clerks?

It is important that this be cleared up for Justice Jackson. Important for anyone who is concerned about women's rights, as I certainly am, being a husband, father, father-in-law, soon to be father-in-law, son, Uncle, cousin, and brother of a dozen or so strong women whose rights I cherish.

Libs?

Sad. The decline is evident.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Past statements by justices most certainly can be used to call for a judge to excuse themselves from a case.

Yes, so she should recuse herself from every case involving women's rights.

The definition of a woman has long been a legal position. It's how we determine things like consent. The judge may one day be required to rule on something like a 16 year old wanting to become emancipated. If she confines her answer to a simple answer she could get called on that later.

Actually, the age of consent laws rarely use the term "woman." Mainly they define the victims of non consensual acts that are non-consensual due to the age of the victim, rather than any resistance or expressed lack of consent. They usually call the victim "the child," not "the person who is not a woman," or some such.

But your point is well taken, that the judge likely meant to say that she doesn't know the legal definition if there is one and that if the USSC were to decide on one, the input of biologists would be obtained (it wouldn't, but whatevs).

Look, the judge made a gaffe. She had to switch back and forth from being spoon-fed heavily scripted questions from her fellow Democrats to being asked real questions by the Reps, and she got rattled. No big deal . . . if the Dems/Media hadn't made it one.

She could have released a statement shortly after the day's questioning to this effect:

Of course I know the definition of "woman," in the common usage. I expected legalistic questions and so I gave a legalistic answer that I could have answered more simply and correctly by stating the commonly accepted dictionary definition, which is "an adult female human being."

She could have then plausibly blamed the GOP for asking such a silly question, if she had treated it as such.

She may well have intended to do that, as she walked out of the hearing room that day. But she was pre-empted by her fellow Democratic activists, especially in the media, who immediately jumped on the "no one can define 'a woman'" bandwagon. So we had the sorry spectacle of other administration nominees and officials being asked to define "a woman," and giving answers like, "I'm looking at one."

That is what made it so absurd and turned a relatively harmless and silly gaffe into the entire Democratic Party once again looking like weirdos to normal people.

 

[otto105]

Wow. He drinks beer? How terrible.

Beer okay, sniveling no.

 

[otto105]

She is a stupid dumbass affirmative action Negro ***** that probably doesn't even know how to spell 'Constitution' no less know what it says.

He’s a stupid dumdass affirmative action sexual groomer that probably doesn’t even know how to spell “pubic hair” no less know that’s offensive.


But hey, his plantation ***** Ginny doesn’t care.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Can you define the word "woman?"

How is that a response to what I wrote?

 

[Correll]

Past statements by justices most certainly can be used to call for a judge to excuse themselves from a case.

People can call for it. And the Justices can ignore that.


This is utter madness. Of such a scale and complexity that future historians will make whole careers in describing and studying the decay of our civilization caused by you people.


If that is, they don't sensibly ban such work, to keep your ideas from accidently getting out, to kill and destroy again, like a demon freed from an arcane prison.

 

[pknopp]

People can call for it. And the Justices can ignore that.


This is utter madness. Of such a scale and complexity that future historians will make whole careers in describing and studying the decay of our civilization caused by you people.


If that is, they don't sensibly ban such work, to keep your ideas from accidently getting out, to kill and destroy again, like a demon freed from an arcane prison.

Not that you care but I completely ignore any reply like this. I am one person, address me.

 

[Correll]

Beer okay, sniveling no.

So, stop doing it.

 

[Burgermeister]

Just another addition to the clown car.

 

[Seymour Flops]

How is that a response to what I wrote?

You said "women," I wanted to make sure I know what you mean by that.

 

[Roudy]

Another radical Leftist hack is installed as part of the Democrats efforts to destroy our institutions.

.

 

[otto105]

So, stop doing it.

Yes, you can at anytime, unless you're addicted to a sniveling brat judge.

 

[otto105]

Another radical Leftist hack is installed as part of the Democrats efforts to destroy our institutions.

.

You QOP fuckups are already working to turn the power out on the shining city on top of a hill.

 

[surada]

My question is will her new colleagues explain to her what the definition of "woman" is? Will she convince them that the definition is unknowable?

Will she be given an extra staff budget to hire a biologist along with her legal clerks?

It is important that this be cleared up for Justice Jackson. Important for anyone who is concerned about women's rights, as I certainly am, being a husband, father, father-in-law, soon to be father-in-law, son, Uncle, cousin, and brother of a dozen or so strong women whose rights I cherish.

Libs?

You're an idiot. Don't you know the difference between biology and psychology?

 

[Meathead]

You're an idiot. Don't you know the difference between biology and psychology?

I know that one is abstract and open to quacks and absurd "liberal" interpretation.

Sex is a biological function and is thus binary. The impregnators are male and the impregnated are female. Everything else is psychological bullshit.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

She also said that she has no opinion on whether people have natural rights, which are at the very heart of the Founding of America.

But slave owners would like that because they denied that blacks had natural rights because they were uncivilized.

She is the most radical person that will have ever served on the Court.

Locke was a fool.