Why wasn't Janice Rogers Brown the first black female supreme court justice?
[b]Ask Joe Biden.[/b]
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
LeopoldBloom · M
Because she was a right-wing lunatic. But I'm more upset that Biden enabled the even more right-wing theocratic loon Clarence Thomas to fill Thurgood Marshall's seat.
You must really be upset over how Mitch McConnell refused to hold hearings for Merrick Garland, keeping Scalia's seat open for over a year, and then rammed Amy Barrett through in record time to fill RBG's seat. Or you're only upset when a right-wing lunatic isn't seated?
You must really be upset over how Mitch McConnell refused to hold hearings for Merrick Garland, keeping Scalia's seat open for over a year, and then rammed Amy Barrett through in record time to fill RBG's seat. Or you're only upset when a right-wing lunatic isn't seated?
LamontCranston · M
@LeopoldBloom Judge brown served on the federal bench with distinction. Your idea of "right wing lunatic" is anyone who doesn't agree with your extremist views, often and tiresomely expressed on this forum.
Happy Independence Day; enjoy your freedom of speech and the other rights your Creator endowed you with.
Happy Independence Day; enjoy your freedom of speech and the other rights your Creator endowed you with.
LeopoldBloom · M
@LamontCranston Cool. Now tell us what you think of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and other liberal justices who also served with distinction.
My "creator" didn't endow me with anything. Any rights I enjoy are courtesy of my fellow citizens and the government we live under. There's no such thing as "inalienable rights," as we just saw, the right to abortion was just taken away. If it were up to our "creator," we'd still have that right as the Bible says in many places that life begins with the first breath.
My "creator" didn't endow me with anything. Any rights I enjoy are courtesy of my fellow citizens and the government we live under. There's no such thing as "inalienable rights," as we just saw, the right to abortion was just taken away. If it were up to our "creator," we'd still have that right as the Bible says in many places that life begins with the first breath.
LamontCranston · M
@LeopoldBloom The paucity of your philosophy is evident in every post and comment.
i am certainly willing to believe that Your Creator left you unendowed> Bt my pricilple problem with you is what a bitter, nasty person you are. Can you not discuss (not debate) any subject without name-calling deprecation and bitterness?
Speaking of RBG, she was on record doubting the constitutional foundation of [i]Roe[/i]. And that was precisely the problem with the decision.
i am certainly willing to believe that Your Creator left you unendowed> Bt my pricilple problem with you is what a bitter, nasty person you are. Can you not discuss (not debate) any subject without name-calling deprecation and bitterness?
Speaking of RBG, she was on record doubting the constitutional foundation of [i]Roe[/i]. And that was precisely the problem with the decision.
LeopoldBloom · M
@LamontCranston Your reasoning is based on the incomplete and biased sources you're following. The idea that RBG was opposed to abortion rights is ludicrous. And later in her life, she affirmed the constitutional basis for Roe v. Wade.
However, I would favor a stronger protection for abortion rights rooted either in the 13th amendment's prohibition against involuntary servitude, or the common law right of self-defense. But what's needed is a constitutional amendment explicitly guaranteeing the right to abortion, as it's obvious that basing it on anything else is just a matter of the opinion of whoever happens to be on the Supreme Court at the moment.
Calling me a "nasty, bitter person" is just projection. You're consumed with hatred for anyone who doesn't conform perfectly to your own degenerate views. Also, when did I call you names? Maybe you're confusing me with your family members?
However, I would favor a stronger protection for abortion rights rooted either in the 13th amendment's prohibition against involuntary servitude, or the common law right of self-defense. But what's needed is a constitutional amendment explicitly guaranteeing the right to abortion, as it's obvious that basing it on anything else is just a matter of the opinion of whoever happens to be on the Supreme Court at the moment.
Calling me a "nasty, bitter person" is just projection. You're consumed with hatred for anyone who doesn't conform perfectly to your own degenerate views. Also, when did I call you names? Maybe you're confusing me with your family members?