Page 19 of 41 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 409

Thread: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

  1. #181
    Guru
    F107HyperSabr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Last Seen
    10-21-10 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,617

    What is objective ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Your supposed to put your "subjective components" aside, personal feelings have no place in judging a case. As tallolou said being a judge requires being impartial and objective.
    If the Constitution says that it is against the law for adults to have sex with children and a man aged 29 has sex with a girl 17 and 7/12 years old did he violate the law?

    Answer is could be!! Wow you say is not that is not objective !! Another guy say "yes it is she was a child".

    Now if the Constitution did not define what age a person ceases being a child and becomes an adult then the Constitution is subject to interpretation.

    Another example: Let us say that the Constituion said "Thou shalt not kill".
    A Quaker refuses to go into the military becasue his religion opposes killing and in the military you may have to kill.

    The attorney for the the Quaker said your honor Mr. Judge Sir the Constitution has an objective law in it and it says "Thou shalt not kill" therefore my client is witin the law to refuse to go into the military.

    The Judge with all his God given wisdom say no councelor you have not interpreted the Constitution correctly that sentence means that it is againsy the law to kill civilians and it is fine to kill other military people especially foreigner. You client in guilty of disopbeying the law and I am sentencein him to death by hanging from his Socialist neck until he dies for being unpatriotic and refusing to serve.
    I do not recall the Viet Cong asking me if I was a natural born or Naturalized American before they shot at me, they just shot at all of us f107HyperSabr

  2. #182
    User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    07-11-11 @ 06:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    78

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    I think the correct translation is "Let's keep this debate related to the qualifications of the candidate and avoid divisive racial remarks."
    Interesting take, given that Sotomayer herself has injected her status as a Latina as a primary issue. Her observation, that her gender, life experience and ethnicity might allow her to provide a wisdom that her white male collegues don't possess is troubling. Her sense that ethnicity and gender are an adequate basis for judicial decisions, apart from law, is a radical departure from accepted practice. I don't blame the WH for attempting to shut this discussion down.

    The test for me is simple; would this POV be acceptable if it were posited by a white man who felt his ethnicity and gender should influence his decisions?

    On a side note, apart from Sotomayor's possible racial and gender bias, it is good to see a Latina on the high court. Celebrate diversity but remember that justice chooses to wear a blindfold. There is a highly important symbolism to that. It is also important to remember that this is one statement from a long and distinguished career. I'll be interested to see what develops.

  3. #183
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: What is objective ??

    Quote Originally Posted by F107HyperSabr View Post
    If the Constitution says that it is against the law for adults to have sex with children and a man aged 29 has sex with a girl 17 and 7/12 years old did he violate the law?

    Answer is could be!! Wow you say is not that is not objective !! Another guy say "yes it is she was a child".

    Now if the Constitution did not define what age a person ceases being a child and becomes an adult then the Constitution is subject to interpretation.

    Another example: Let us say that the Constituion said "Thou shalt not kill".
    A Quaker refuses to go into the military becasue his religion opposes killing and in the military you may have to kill.

    The attorney for the the Quaker said your honor Mr. Judge Sir the Constitution has an objective law in it and it says "Thou shalt not kill" therefore my client is witin the law to refuse to go into the military.

    The Judge with all his God given wisdom say no councelor you have not interpreted the Constitution correctly that sentence means that it is againsy the law to kill civilians and it is fine to kill other military people especially foreigner. You client in guilty of disopbeying the law and I am sentencein him to death by hanging from his Socialist neck until he dies for being unpatriotic and refusing to serve.
    Interesting that you don't actually use things IN the constitution, just what if's. And a silly finale at that.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  4. #184
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: What is objective ??

    Quote Originally Posted by F107HyperSabr View Post
    If the Constitution says that it is against the law for adults to have sex with children and a man aged 29 has sex with a girl 17 and 7/12 years old did he violate the law?

    Answer is could be!! Wow you say is not that is not objective !! Another guy say "yes it is she was a child".

    Now if the Constitution did not define what age a person ceases being a child and becomes an adult then the Constitution is subject to interpretation.

    Another example: Let us say that the Constituion said "Thou shalt not kill".
    A Quaker refuses to go into the military becasue his religion opposes killing and in the military you may have to kill.

    The attorney for the the Quaker said your honor Mr. Judge Sir the Constitution has an objective law in it and it says "Thou shalt not kill" therefore my client is witin the law to refuse to go into the military.

    The Judge with all his God given wisdom say no councelor you have not interpreted the Constitution correctly that sentence means that it is againsy the law to kill civilians and it is fine to kill other military people especially foreigner. You client in guilty of disopbeying the law and I am sentencein him to death by hanging from his Socialist neck until he dies for being unpatriotic and refusing to serve.
    You do realize the applicable Constitution is that of the United States of America and not the People's Republic of China, I hope?

  5. #185
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by Mick View Post
    Interesting take, given that Sotomayer herself has injected her status as a Latina as a primary issue. Her observation, that her gender, life experience and ethnicity might allow her to provide a wisdom that her white male collegues don't possess is troubling. Her sense that ethnicity and gender are an adequate basis for judicial decisions, apart from law, is a radical departure from accepted practice. I don't blame the WH for attempting to shut this discussion down.

    The test for me is simple; would this POV be acceptable if it were posited by a white man who felt his ethnicity and gender should influence his decisions?

    On a side note, apart from Sotomayor's possible racial and gender bias, it is good to see a Latina on the high court. Celebrate diversity but remember that justice chooses to wear a blindfold. There is a highly important symbolism to that. It is also important to remember that this is one statement from a long and distinguished career. I'll be interested to see what develops.
    Sotomayer's quote about Latina women and white men was taken out of context. Here is the context:

    Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.

    Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group.
    It is easy to take issue with a quote that you misrepresent. Tell me now what issue you have with Sotomayer's actual statement.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us...l?pagewanted=5

  6. #186
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    Sotomayer's quote about Latina women and white men was taken out of context. Here is the context:



    It is easy to take issue with a quote that you misrepresent. Tell me now what issue you have with Sotomayer's actual statement.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us...l?pagewanted=5
    It's still all about her race and gender meaning something, it doesn't. The Constitution matters. What her attitude shows, is that what she believes is couched in her "life" and who she "is as a person" more so then what the Constitution means. I.E. she's another idiot that believes the Constitution is a Living Document. Able to change on the whims of the times rather then... ya know, through that amendment process.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  7. #187
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    It's still all about her race and gender meaning something, it doesn't. The Constitution matters. What her attitude shows, is that what she believes is couched in her "life" and who she "is as a person" more so then what the Constitution means. I.E. she's another idiot that believes the Constitution is a Living Document. Able to change on the whims of the times rather then... ya know, through that amendment process.
    As usual, you do not even attempt to understand the actual record. Sotomayer was speaking in the context of a symposium titled "Raising the Bar: Latino and Latina Presence in the Judiciary and the Struggle for Representation". She is making the case that a judicial decision regarding a minority lifestyle might be more fair coming from a judge who is a product of that lifestyle. She makes no mention of the Constitution as a "living document", that is your quote, not hers.
    Clearly, the heart of your disagreement with the Sotomayer choice is that she is a woman, is not white, and was selected by a Democratic president. All the rest of your "argument" is transparent and meaningless.
    Last edited by WillRockwell; 05-28-09 at 10:31 AM.

  8. #188
    Advisor TheHat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    01-17-13 @ 06:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    551

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    I think the correct translation is "Let's keep this debate related to the qualifications of the candidate and avoid divisive racial remarks."
    Yeah, I agree. That is for Democrats to take issue with. It was Democrats who used race in stonewalling Miguel Estrada, after special interest groups gave Senators their short list of who is and who is not dangerous.

    One of the reasons he was dangerous according to Democrats and their special interests:

    "...And he is Latino".

  9. #189
    Mod Apologist

    missypea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,152

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Maybe I'm wrong but it's my understanding that judges interpret the law. When it comes to interpretation of anything there's a broad range to choose from.

    You say teal.
    I say green
    Joe says blue
    Tucker might say it's orange

    Who is correct? That's how they see it.

    My opinion of the SC is that it should be diverse. I prefer the bench to have diverse life experiences to draw from. I want discussions, opposing ideas, differing POV accompanying rationale and logic. The decisions the SC rules on shouldn't come easy.


    I would chat with her when I'm feeling particularly snarky, but I wouldn't ever call her on the phone.

  10. #190
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: W.H. to Sotomayor critics: Be 'careful'

    Quote Originally Posted by TheHat View Post
    Yeah, I agree. That is for Democrats to take issue with. It was Democrats who used race in stonewalling Miguel Estrada, after special interest groups gave Senators their short list of who is and who is not dangerous.

    One of the reasons he was dangerous according to Democrats and their special interests:

    "...And he is Latino".
    Estrada was nominated by George Bush for the DC Court of Appeals despite the fact he had never served as a judge on the local, state or federal level. His race had nothing to do with it, except that Bush probably figured being a Latino would grease the nomination despite a total lack of experience.

Page 19 of 41 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •