How the other recent nominees to the Highest Court have defined "Women"

[Admin.]

I have a couple things on my plate this afternoon, but i think we have some pretty smart legal scholars in this forum who could run down this critical information.

So post your answers below.

 

[Admin.]

Maybe that is too broad, how about the last 3 "Skirts" nominated to the bench

So lets have Amy Cony Barrett's, Elena Kagan's, and Sonia Sotomayor's Definition of Women

 

[Admin.]

Anybody, Dove? Beuler?

 

[Admin.]

:Bump:


I've looked all over the place and I can't find a single mention of any SCOTUS nominees defining Woman, that sure seems odd, in light of the recent brouhaha over it.


Anyone else having any luck?

 

[Dove]

THIS justice refused to define woman because....in HER WORDS....shes "not a biologist".

The fact you dont see ANY of this as a problem is exactly why WOMENS RIGHTS are in direct danger.

@Joe has vocalized concerns about womens rights being reversed. I'm sure that has more to do with prostitution and abortion and less to do with our sex based rights, though.

So Admin when are you guys gonna pick up the torch to fight for tax funded abortion clinics in prisons to take care of all the rape babies that are gonna start becoming a problem in womens prison? Since you are fine with the rape and abuse going on in there for "transrights"?

 

[Breakfall]

:facepalm:

 

[Biggie Smiles]

Pity post

cause admin seems to need it

 

[Admin.]

THIS justice refused to define woman because....in HER WORDS....shes "not a biologist".

The fact you dont see ANY of this as a problem is exactly why WOMENS RIGHTS are in direct danger.

@Joe has vocalized concerns about womens rights being reversed. I'm sure that has more to do with prostitution and abortion and less to do with our sex based rights, though.

So Admin when are you guys gonna pick up the torch to fight for tax funded abortion clinics in prisons to take care of all the rape babies that are gonna start becoming a problem in womens prison? Since you are fine with the rape and abuse going on in there for "transrights"?

So fucking what? In legal circles, such as in trials, they don't bring in a Truck Driver to testify about Knee Surgeries. Nor does the presiding Judge explain to the Jury what a knee surgery involves, the hired knee surgery professional will. do you follow? Watch an episode or two of law and order, git you sum lurnin!

 

[Biggie Smiles]

omg.... :facepalm:

 

[Dove]

THIS justice refused to define woman because....in HER WORDS....shes "not a biologist".

The fact you dont see ANY of this as a problem is exactly why WOMENS RIGHTS are in direct danger.

@Joe has vocalized concerns about womens rights being reversed. I'm sure that has more to do with prostitution and abortion and less to do with our sex based rights, though.

So Admin when are you guys gonna pick up the torch to fight for tax funded abortion clinics in prisons to take care of all the rape babies that are gonna start becoming a problem in womens prison? Since you are fine with the rape and abuse going on in there for "transrights"?

So fucking what? In legal circles, such as in trials, they don't bring in a Truck Driver to testify about Knee Surgeries. Nor does the presiding Judge explain to the Jury what a knee surgery involves, the hired knee surgery professional will. do you follow? Watch an episode or two of law and order, git you sum lurnin!

Except she wasnt asked what was involved in knee surgery

She was asked to define WOMAN.

So when I call myself a woman.....I shouldnt be doing that because I'm not a biologist? That's your fucking argument. That we cannot define "woman" unless we have degrees in biology.

You must hate women. If your "side" tells you that what women are is so complicated only experts can define them.....that's fucking misogyny. And you saying womens rights dont even exist.

 

[Reggie_Essent]

But Ukraine!

 

[Admin.]

We should have a national deevorce over manufactured semantics outrage. It's a bigly terrible disaster!

 

[Adam]

Is Aidsman arguing that there are 65 different genders again?

I don't even want to know which one he identifies as this week....

 

[Breakfall]

Is Aidsman arguing that there are 65 different genders again?

I don't even want to know which one he identifies as this week....

But years ago you admitted to shaving your arse! Lol

 

[Breakfall]

I have the memory of an elephant!

 

[Adam]

Eh? Nah, I shave my groin, not my ass.

 

[Breakfall]

Eh? Nah, I shave my groin, not my ass.

Nah….you said it! Lol

 

[Breakfall]

Hey…I dig chicks licking my clean arse too!

 

[Breakfall]

 

[Seamajor]

Is Aidsman arguing that there are 65 different genders again?

I don't even want to know which one he identifies as this week....

But years ago you admitted to shaving your arse! Lol

As I recall, it included nut sack, and legs. I dismissed it due to Scouses personal vanity.

 

[Dove]

We should have a national deevorce over manufactured semantics outrage. It's a bigly terrible disaster!

You are arguing that defining "woman" should be left to experts and saying that "woman" isnt defined in legislation.

And instead of acknowledging the very real issues involving womens rights, you avoid them all together and post these completely idiotic memes and call it "semantics". Trying hard to keep the convo as shallow and dumb as possible so you can dodge what it is you are actually supporting.

If you are gonna take a position you should fully understand it and own it completely. Otherwise you are just a partisan hack with no true convictions of your own. A coward who will fight whatever cause your "group" wants you to fight. Even causes that attack and undo the rights of women.

 

[Dove]

We can't protect something that is viewed merely as a social construct and otherwise doesn't exist....

You know that's where they're going with this shit.

 

[Joe]

THIS justice refused to define woman because....in HER WORDS....shes "not a biologist".

The fact you dont see ANY of this as a problem is exactly why WOMENS RIGHTS are in direct danger.

@Joe has vocalized concerns about womens rights being reversed. I'm sure that has more to do with prostitution and abortion and less to do with our sex based rights, though.

So Admin when are you guys gonna pick up the torch to fight for tax funded abortion clinics in prisons to take care of all the rape babies that are gonna start becoming a problem in womens prison? Since you are fine with the rape and abuse going on in there for "transrights"?

So fucking what? In legal circles, such as in trials, they don't bring in a Truck Driver to testify about Knee Surgeries. Nor does the presiding Judge explain to the Jury what a knee surgery involves, the hired knee surgery professional will. do you follow? Watch an episode or two of law and order, git you sum lurnin!

These USSC justices have way too much power in relation to the actual knowledge or experise they possess. The world is becoming so complex that it should not be a mere 9 judges who decide contentious case outcomes.

They should not be appointed for life either. No other sensible Democracy allows their Supreme court justices to remain on the bench past 75 years of age.

 

[Dove]

THIS justice refused to define woman because....in HER WORDS....shes "not a biologist".

The fact you dont see ANY of this as a problem is exactly why WOMENS RIGHTS are in direct danger.

@Joe has vocalized concerns about womens rights being reversed. I'm sure that has more to do with prostitution and abortion and less to do with our sex based rights, though.

So Admin when are you guys gonna pick up the torch to fight for tax funded abortion clinics in prisons to take care of all the rape babies that are gonna start becoming a problem in womens prison? Since you are fine with the rape and abuse going on in there for "transrights"?

So fucking what? In legal circles, such as in trials, they don't bring in a Truck Driver to testify about Knee Surgeries. Nor does the presiding Judge explain to the Jury what a knee surgery involves, the hired knee surgery professional will. do you follow? Watch an episode or two of law and order, git you sum lurnin!

These USSC justices have way too much power in relation to the actual knowledge or experise they possess. The world is becoming so complex that it should not be a mere 9 judges who decide contentious case outcomes.

They should not be appointed for life either. No other sensible Democracy allows their Supreme court justices to remain on the bench past 75 years of age.

We can simplify a lot by not giving actual extremists who push "complex" ideologies power and platforms.