Biden's SCOTUS "Black Woman" Nominee can not Define the Word "Woman" (Read 7339 times)

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Biden's SCOTUS "Black Woman" Nominee can not Define the Word "Woman"
« Reply #20 on: April 03, 2022, 11:53:35 PM »
I stand corrected she did give some context for her question. However I would say that Judge Jackson's answer was relatively appropriate. Her answer would have been more precise if she pointed out that it is congress' job to decide definitions in laws, not a judge's job. Additionally if a judge was deciding a case that involved the definition of the word woman it would matter the specifics of the case, that context would be needed. So for example if two different laws defined "woman" slightly different, a judge's decision could depend on the definition as it existed in the law. So in that aspect, Senator Blackburn's question lacked context since it didn't mention a specific law or legal definition.

Wrong.  When a law/definition is missing or ambiguous, it's the judge's job to interpret the law and decide on the definitions using common knowledge and plain meanings.

You really think every gender-related law to date defines what a woman is?  Or needs to?
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

changemyoil66

I stand corrected she did give some context for her question. However I would say that Judge Jackson's answer was relatively appropriate. Her answer would have been more precise if she pointed out that it is congress' job to decide definitions in laws, not a judge's job. Additionally if a judge was deciding a case that involved the definition of the word woman it would matter the specifics of the case, that context would be needed. So for example if two different laws defined "woman" slightly different, a judge's decision could depend on the definition as it existed in the law. So in that aspect, Senator Blackburn's question lacked context since it didn't mention a specific law or legal definition.
Missing the bigger picture. Guess which side she would align herself with. Then guess what kind of scotus cases we expect to hear in the next years.

Heres a hint, there is more than 2 genders.

On a side note, feminist are very silent about dudes dominating in female sports. Hence theyre fake feminist.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

eyeeatingfish

Re: Biden's SCOTUS "Black Woman" Nominee can not Define the Word "Woman"
« Reply #22 on: April 09, 2022, 01:28:02 PM »
Wrong.  When a law/definition is missing or ambiguous, it's the judge's job to interpret the law and decide on the definitions using common knowledge and plain meanings.

You really think every gender-related law to date defines what a woman is?  Or needs to?

Wrong.

A judge can say a definition or term in the law is inadequate or too vague for the law for be enforced.

To answer your question, I would say yes. Now that people have this crazy notion that men can be women it will become necessary to add a definition. As you said they look at common knowledge and plain meanings and if the trans community gets their way, it will be part of common knowledge.

eyeeatingfish

Missing the bigger picture. Guess which side she would align herself with. Then guess what kind of scotus cases we expect to hear in the next years.

Heres a hint, there is more than 2 genders.

On a side note, feminist are very silent about dudes dominating in female sports. Hence theyre fake feminist.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I did not hear the entire confirmation hearing, did she say anything to indicate which side she would come down on? When it came to gender the only thing I saw her do was avoid the question.

And as for "which side" I think this is a non-starter. I don't think SCOTUS judges have political allegiances like that, to where they rule on a case based on how democrats or republicans want them to rule.

She is apparently an avid church goer and among the church community being pro-trans is not really a popular position so I think you are jumping to conclusions if you think she is just going to side with them.

robtmc

Re: Biden's SCOTUS "Black Woman" Nominee can not Define the Word "Woman"
« Reply #24 on: April 10, 2022, 08:14:24 PM »
.

changemyoil66

I did not hear the entire confirmation hearing, did she say anything to indicate which side she would come down on? When it came to gender the only thing I saw her do was avoid the question.

And as for "which side" I think this is a non-starter. I don't think SCOTUS judges have political allegiances like that, to where they rule on a case based on how democrats or republicans want them to rule.

She is apparently an avid church goer and among the church community being pro-trans is not really a popular position so I think you are jumping to conclusions if you think she is just going to side with them.
Wrong

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

RSN172


Heres a hint, there is more than 2 genders.

Andy Bumatai said when he was growing up there were only 4 flavors....boy, girl, mahu and butchie.
Happily living in Puna

QUIETShooter

Andy Bumatai said when he was growing up there were only 4 flavors....boy, girl, mahu and butchie.

Life was so much simpler back then. 

But yeah, that's how we looked at genders in those days.
Sometimes you gotta know when to save your bullets.

changemyoil66

Bump

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

eyeeatingfish

Wrong

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Did Flapp hack into your account ?  ;D

robtmc

Re: Biden's SCOTUS "Black Woman" Nominee can not Define the Word "Woman"
« Reply #30 on: April 13, 2022, 03:45:33 PM »
.

changemyoil66

Did Flapp hack into your account ?  ;D
What makes u ask?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Flapp_Jackson

What makes u ask?

FDS ....

Flapp
Derangement
Syndrome
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw