Normal for a Supreme Court appointment is a bunch of political "gotcha" questions.
"How do you define: 'woman' "
This is now a political gotcha. The fact that this question can determine which side you are on is a mark of how far we've progressed into idiocy.
5
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
7 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.There are laws on the books that protect 'women'. If a Justice can not define 'woman', how are they to rule whether the law applies to a particular 'woman' or not.
This is law 101 - as a matter of fact, in MANY statutes, the FIRST item, usually 101, is for definitions to be used within the rest of the statute.
So, it is NOT a gotcha. If the Justice uses the definition 'whomever identifies as a woman', then there is no protection for women. And statutes like Title IX become meaningless.
tracycoyle
Level 8
Mar 24, 2022
4
Excellent points!
We have descended from "gaslighting" into "fartlighting".
FrankZeleniuk
Level 8
Mar 24, 2022
2
But fartlighting is funny at least...
My first thought was, what does that have to do with the law and one’s ability to judge if something is constitutional or not (the job of a Supreme Court justice).
Then I thought of all the issues likely to come up in the Supreme Court and the effect of their understanding of what the word “Woman” means. The way the justices would interpret this word WRT the constitutionality of a law, may make the difference between justice and injustice.
After further consideration, I have come to the conclusion that this may have been intended as a “gotcha” question, however, it is worth consideration for all candidates to be able to show their worthiness to judge fairly on the constitutionality of power courts’ handling of a legal case WRT laws that effect women and men differently.
There is no mathematical formulas for judging; it requires impartial judgment of facts. Therefore, being able to recognize facts is crucial. If one can not even determine if an assailant or victim is male or female, human or beast, animate or inanimate, etc, how can they be trusted to show impartial, wise judgment?
Daveclark5
Level 8
Mar 24, 2022
2
Yeah, Jackson brought this out. The law is written and set. How can you build a logical argument based on a priori assumptions when base assumptions cannot be defined?
My initial point is a tangent to this issue. How in the hell can this possibly be the "unanswerable question." 4 yr olds have a more solid definition.
It is typical for the nominee to dodge questions asked by the opposing party. Jackson is doing it. Barrett did it. Kavanaugh did it. Republicans cried that people brought up Barrett's religion, Democrats thought it was necessary. Democrats are crying that people are bringing up Jackson's religion, Republicans think it is necessary. They are all hypocrites.
SCOTUS confirmation hearings for the past decade or two are nothing but an excuse for the opposing party to have a platform to rail against whatever issue they feel is the hot topic of the day, basically talking at the nominee and ranting rather than actually asking questions or sticking to relevant topics.
JacksonNought
Level 8
Mar 24, 2022
0
"How do you define: 'woman' "
"to dodge questions asked by the opposing party." "they feel is the hot topic of the day, "
The point of my post.
@Penrodster how is that relevant to whether a SCOTUS justice will follow the Constitution? Why is that a necessary question by a Republican committee member. It is a gotcha because the Republican doesn't care about the answer - they just want to use it as a soundbite to push the latest culture war issue and get pats on the back and rile up their base for votes and fundraising.
Amy Coney Barrett declined to answer questions on her personal views on abortion. Do you think that is a gotcha question? Why couldn't she answer a simple question?
@JacksonNought "how is that relevant to whether a SCOTUS justice will follow the Constitution?" Not the point of my post which is "How far have we devolved that THIS is a gotcha question?"
"declined to answer questions on her personal views on abortion " A gotcha question but you place "How do you define: 'woman' " and personal view of abortion in the same realm. My point is we've entered a whole new realm of idiocy.
@Penrodster asking a SCOTUS nominee a question on biology is indeed a "gotcha" question that has no relevance to legal rulings, especially when you absolutely no the reason behind the question.
@JacksonNought I almost cannot believe the level of your reasoning, or lack thereof.
@dmatic do tell, why do you consider it a reasonable question to ask a SCOTUS nominee?
Would you consider to reasonable to have asked Barrett if she would rule in favor of the Pope over the Constitution, or if she would let her husband decide her ruling?
@JacksonNought You really don't see the wisdom in the question? Her non-answer shows exactly where she is and how she "thinks". Finding out how someone thinks is very important in the process of confirming a Supreme Court nominee. This one seems a little addled.
@dmatic did you protest when Barrett refused to answer her opinion on abortion? Or about the ACA? Or about BLM and George Floyd? Again, should Barrett have been asked, given her religion's specific tenets about having men make decisions for women, if she would let her husband decide all of her rulings for her?
@JacksonNought Sorry, not aware of those tenets of which you distract. So you want to examine hypocrisy, is that it?
@dmatic who is deflecting now? Why don't you prove you are better than Jackson and answer the question.
Would it have been appropriate the flat out ask Barrett, during her confirmation, if she would let her husband make all of her legal rulings for her?
@JacksonNought Sure. In a country that values free speech, one can ask any question they want. The respondent can then answer it, or not, and their answer or non-answer can be used to gather information on how a candidate thinks, or find out who, or what is influencing their thoughts and heart.
@JacksonNought "asking a SCOTUS nominee a question on biology is indeed a "gotcha" question"
Since when? "Boys have a penis, Girls have a vagina" is an edgy meme now. If Jackson is less competent than a 6yr old boy on simple biological facts why does she get nominated.
"a question on biology"
Are you serious? For real, are you serious?
Her non-answer was truly revealing! What a great question! How in the world of non-idiocy can we trust a 'judge' to rule on matters when she cannot even discern what a woman is? Idiocy indeed!
dmatic
Level 8
Mar 24, 2022
4
We have descended from "gaslighting" into "fartlighting".
I'm finding the non-answers to be the most illuminating answers.
Recent Visitors 17
Photos 11,797 More
Posted by JohnHoukGlobalist Tyranny Videos Batch – Part TWO SUMMARY: The video list I’m sharing leans more toward Globalist Tyranny (which includes the American traitors – the Dem-Marxists) in this batch.
Posted by JohnHoukGlobalist Tyranny Videos Batch – Part ONE SUMMARY: I’ve spent the last few days looking at saved videos largely from Telegram Social Media.
Posted by JohnHoukWATCH OUT FOR AN AI TYRANNY & NSA Spying SUMMARY: I’ve witnessed too many dark-side leaps and bounds to give credence to AI-Tyranny naysayers.
Posted by Sensrhim4hizvewzCohencidence or PLANNED???
Posted by Sensrhim4hizvewz Hopefully, everyone catches it and everyone gets better
Posted by JohnHoukFBI Investigates Baltimore Bridge Collapse! Suggests NOT an Accident! SUMMARY: On 3/27/24 I shared a Lara Logan Tweet on her opinion of what caused the Francis Scott Key Bridge near Baltimore ship ...
Posted by JohnHoukPolitical Tyranny – Part Two Videos Showing the Political Tyranny of Factionalism & Globalist Entanglements SUMMARY: IN Part 1 I used President Washington’s 1796 Farewell Address as a ...
Posted by JohnHoukPolitical Tyranny – Part One President Washington Warned of the Insidious Outcome of Political Factions & Foreign Entanglements SUMMARY: George Washington – RIGHTLY SO – is called the Father...
Posted by JohnHoukFuellmich Political Persecution Encapsulates Globalist Lawfare SUMMARY: A few thoughts on Deep State Political Persecution of Trump & Supports.
Posted by JohnHoukLooking at Birx Not Fauci Managed Medical Tyranny Includes Personal Observations on Legit President Trump SUMMARY: Looking at a VNN examination of the short Documentary: “It Wasn't Fauci: How ...
Posted by FocusOn1Uh oh, i hate to say this, but israel was formed in 1948, 100 years after karl marx wrote his book. Was it formed as a atheist communist country?
Posted by MosheBenIssacWith woke fat ass acceptance, only applies to women (fat bitches). What used to be funny is now illegal. The video won a Grammy Award for Best Concept Music Video in 1988 [youtu.be]
Posted by JohnHoukRemember WHY You Are Resisting the Coup Summary: Well… It’s series of videos time again.
Posted by JohnHoukA Call for Intercession Over WHO Power Grab Treaty SUMMARY: A call for prayer on America’s leaders related to the National Sovereignty terminating Pandemic (better known as Plandemic) Treaty.
Posted by MosheBenIssacDisney COLLAPSES Billions Lost In MINUTES After Shareholders Troll Company Sticking With WOKE! [youtu.be]
Posted by JohnHoukIntro to Maj.