sds:
“We’ve had 110 (Supreme Court) justices appointed, and all but four of them have been straight, white men, then it might be time to think a little more broadly about who sits on the highest court in the land.”Totally apart from the morality and policy issues (because it’s not like we haven’t beaten that horse to death), I think it’s a problem when seemingly every issue is looked at through this lense of sexuality.
I mean, seriously, isn’t impartiality, intellectual prowess, knowledge of the law, and committment to applying (not creating) it far more important than one’s sexual orientation? The fact that people are advocating for or against someone’s placement on the bench purely on the basis of sexuality is an adventure in missing the point. So the question is, are they?
If orientation shouldn’t matter, then statistically it’s unlikely we’d have a homosexual on the bench any time soon, considering the percentage of the population is so tiny. Which means it’s likely that many folks’ main article of support is the judge’s orientation. Which is, simply put, stupid.
Thank you.
Source: enteekaygee
