Page 34 of 41 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 340 of 409

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

  1. #331
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

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

    Quote Originally Posted by F107HyperSabr View Post
    Nope !! The term 'old white' when has been used as a euphamism for a long time now to describe the SUPREMES. Actually even the Senate was not too long ago euphamistically refered to as a club for old white men.
    Wasn't that the same rationale Jesse Jackson used to explain calling New York "Hymietown"?

  2. #332
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:38 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,335
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    Causation and correlation never amount to the same thing.

    You (and Sotomayor) are arguing the logical fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc ("with this, therefore because of this").

    The short version of the rule is causation is not correlation. More properly, correlation (or covariance) is a necessary predicate for causation, thus the more accurate form is "Correlation is not equal to causation; it is only a requirement for it."

    Sotomayor, when she stated "our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging," is asserting more than correlation, she asserting causation (perversely, the assertion is demonstrably fatuous because she prefaces it by acknowledging total ignorance of the precise causal link).

    To assert that female jurists will rule differently because they are female, to assert that Latino and Latina jurists will rule differently because they are Latino or Latina, to assert that male jurists will rule differently because they are male, is to assert a differentiation based on gender and/or ethnicity; it is to assert that there is distinction and differentiation based on gender and/or ethnicity. There is no way to make such an assertion and not assert such a differentiation.
    We both agree that women rule differently on womens issues than men. is this true? You at least claimed to have seen the studies that Sotomayer references. Now, if women rule differently than men, what possible reason other than gender, or a direct result of gender(ie the different upbringing between men or women) is there? You are using a lot of fancy wording to try and obscure a simple idea.

    Further, what difference does it make why, if we know that it does exist? Simply knowing that it exists is enough to react to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord
    If one argues a differentiation based on gender and ethnicity, if one argues a different jurisprudential model based on gender and ethnicity, then one cannot also argue for equal application of law, equal protection of the law, or even equality under the law. The two arguments are mutually exclusive.
    Bull! Difference does not mean that thing cannot be equal. We are not walking the realm of old "different but equal" that was eventually overruled. We are acknowledging that people have different upbringing, different views, different ways of looking at things. Different people can interpret the law differently, both with the best of intentions and logic and beliefs. This does not make things inherently unequal, only different. If we accept that judges are trying to dispense justice as best they can within the framework of the law, equality of race, and gender, and ethnicity follows, if not in every single case, then overall, and the system is designed to protect from those aberrations that occur from time to time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Celticlord
    If one argues a differentiation based on gender and/or ethnicity, one forsakes Dr. King's dream, wherein people "will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

    Personally, I prefer this nation continue to strive for Dr. King's dream. It's a good dream.
    No one is arguing that. What Sotomeyar is arguing is that a breadth of experience leads to a greater chance of equality. She is not suggesting, not in any way, that the court should not strive for equality, only that a court of one race, one gender, one ethnicity is less likely to achieve equality than one that is a melting pot of gender and ethnicity.

  3. #333
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Tiamat's better half
    Last Seen
    10-28-11 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,998

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    So did you feel the same way about Alito?
    Why would I feel the same way about Alito?

    My issue with Sotomayer is that she seems to think a bias based on her heritage or her femaleness is ok. She also seems to think this is acceptable and is unapologetic about it.

    Let's look at the difference between some statements:

    “A judge can't have any preferred outcome in any particular case. The judge's only obligation — and it's a solemn obligation — is to the rule of law.” -Alito

    or

    “The role of a practicing attorney is to achieve a desirable result for the client in the particular case at hand. But a judge can't think that way. A judge can't have any agenda, a judge can't have any preferred outcome in any particular case and a judge certainly doesn't have a client.” - Alito

    Samuel Alito quotes

    vs.

    "All of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for people out there with court of appeals experience, because court of appeals is where policy is made. And I know, I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law, I know. I know. " - Sotomayer

    or

    "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. " - Sotomayer

    "Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. " - Sotomayer

    Sonia Sotomayor Quotes

    Do you see the difference? To me, it's striking. I'm shocked actually that a judge would use the language she uses.

    From Alito's hearing:

    "But, although the judiciary has a very important role to play, it's a limited role. It is not -- it should always be asking itself whether it is straying over the bounds, whether it's invading the authority of the legislature, for example, whether it is making policy judgments rather than interpreting the law."

    More from the confirmation hearing:

    "Judges have to be careful not to inject their own views into the interpretation of the Constitution and, for that matter, into the interpretation of statutes. That's not the job that we are given. That's not authority that we are given."

    "Results-oriented jurisprudence is never justified because it is not our job to try to produce particular results. We are not policy-makers and we shouldn't be implementing any sort of policy agenda or policy preferences that we have"

    U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Judge Samuel Alito's Nomination to the Supreme Court - washingtonpost.com

    So why would I feel the same way about these two?

  4. #334
    Guru
    F107HyperSabr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Last Seen
    10-21-10 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,617

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

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    Wasn't that the same rationale Jesse Jackson used to explain calling New York "Hymietown"?
    DON'T KNOW, DON'T CARE, don't pay atention to what Yessie Yackson has to say !!
    “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

  5. #335
    Guru
    F107HyperSabr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Last Seen
    10-21-10 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,617

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

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    Of course you do. He's feeding to your right-wing talking points.
    don't you mean crying points ?? LOL
    “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

  6. #336
    Advisor FlappyTheKinkajou's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-09 @ 07:49 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    406

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

    Quote Originally Posted by F107HyperSabr View Post
    don't you mean crying points ?? LOL
    Does crying indicate falsehoods? Were all the Democrats who were against the war simply crying?
    Let's figure it out.

  7. #337
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    We both agree that women rule differently on womens issues than men. is this true? You at least claimed to have seen the studies that Sotomayer references. Now, if women rule differently than men, what possible reason other than gender, or a direct result of gender(ie the different upbringing between men or women) is there? You are using a lot of fancy wording to try and obscure a simple idea.
    There is a correlation. I do not state, nor do I believe, that a female jurist rules on issues a certain way merely because she is female.

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Further, what difference does it make why, if we know that it does exist? Simply knowing that it exists is enough to react to it.
    It is enough to react wrongly. If you do not establish causation, you have no assurance your reaction will produce a desired result. Without a definitive causative link, any reaction is by definition irrational, illogical, and most likely ill-considered and ill-omened.

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Bull! Difference does not mean that thing cannot be equal. We are not walking the realm of old "different but equal" that was eventually overruled. We are acknowledging that people have different upbringing, different views, different ways of looking at things. Different people can interpret the law differently, both with the best of intentions and logic and beliefs. This does not make things inherently unequal, only different. If we accept that judges are trying to dispense justice as best they can within the framework of the law, equality of race, and gender, and ethnicity follows, if not in every single case, then overall, and the system is designed to protect from those aberrations that occur from time to time.
    The bull is your desperate pretense that Sotomayor asserted (or that you assert) anything but "separate (different) but equal." And the rebuttal is a simple adaptation of Thurgood Marshall: Different but equal is inherently unequal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    No one is arguing that. What Sotomeyar is arguing is that a breadth of experience leads to a greater chance of equality. She is not suggesting, not in any way, that the court should not strive for equality, only that a court of one race, one gender, one ethnicity is less likely to achieve equality than one that is a melting pot of gender and ethnicity.
    Except she was not arguing experience, and, as your closing demonstrates, neither are you; she argued and you argue gender and ethnicity. Equating those to "experience" is beyond ludicrous.

  8. #338
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,468

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    That is for the President and Senate to decide no?
    No. The rule of law, not having a constitution of mere guidelines and a separation of powers demands it.

    This is why your ideas about having American institutions in Britain worries me Laila, the American court system has not worked out well imho, we do not want a court system so independent(obviously a necessary degree of independence is required and we have always had it in Britain for centuries) as to be literally the arbiter of the constitution and whole set up of gov't. Ultimately I must say the anti-federalist, specifically Brutus, and Jefferson were correct, we should avoid such a system.
    Last edited by Wessexman; 05-29-09 at 10:17 PM.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  9. #339
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:38 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,335
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    Except she was not arguing experience, and, as your closing demonstrates, neither are you; she argued and you argue gender and ethnicity. Equating those to "experience" is beyond ludicrous.
    We are going to go round and round on this, to no point. I think we can agree on that. There seems to be a disconnect between us that is not going to be overcome here. So just a quick comment on the above quoted.

    Gender and ethnicity are part of experience. Men and women have different upbringing, leading to a different set of experiences. You have never had a gynecological exam, or a yeast infection, just to name a couple quick things off the top of my head(due to a stupid joke my brother told me earlier). A hispanic has a different set of experiences from a black person from a white person.

  10. #340
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:38 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,335
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by F107HyperSabr View Post
    don't you mean crying points ?? LOL
    We are having some quality discussions here. Can we please not lower the tone?

Page 34 of 41 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... 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
  •