Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
01-08-2003, 05:19 PM | #1 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
Bush renominates Pickering, Owen
President Renominates Miss. Judge, 29 Others
Quote:
|
|
01-08-2003, 05:21 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 638
|
That is so wrong. I can believe it but it sure makes me sick.
|
01-08-2003, 05:38 PM | #3 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
|
01-08-2003, 05:55 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 633
|
Danya,
Why is is wrong? |
01-08-2003, 06:13 PM | #5 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 1,531
|
Fromtheright asks a very good question, Danya. Why is it wrong to nominate federal judges who have historically favored racism and opposed civil rights legislation? Any ideas on that?
|
01-08-2003, 06:18 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 633
|
copernicus,
Sly grin noted but, as I just posted in another thread on this issue, I was not aware of the racial baggage. I think you do understand that my question was simply why it is wrong to renominate a judicial appointment. Fr. Andrew noted in the other thread that the baggage is there, justified or not. My question, first of all, is what is the baggage, and secondly, does it matter whether the accusations are true? |
01-08-2003, 08:22 PM | #7 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 1,531
|
Are the accusations true? That depends on what the accusations are. There has been a very strong and well-organized effort by right-wing partisans to show that Pickering's reversals should not be held against him. That is debatable. For the reasons cited in this PFAW article, I think that they should.
However, what really upsets most of his critics is not his judicial record, but his record of racist and anti-abortionpolitical activism. He has not stood out as a man who promotes moderate or conservative views of the law. He has been very clear about his desire to interpret the law as it stood when American apartheid was legal and women had to cede partial ownership of their wombs to the government. But maybe modern Americans need to go back to race riots and the back-alley abortions to understand what those struggles really were about in the first place. |
01-09-2003, 06:37 AM | #8 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Middle, Kansas
Posts: 2,637
|
It is sad and frightening, but it is what we get for voting these idiots in.
I'm going to say it again. Bush raised more money, faster than anyone ever. Who thinks he is not beholden to those who have given over 1 billion to the Republican party over the past 3 years? |
01-09-2003, 08:48 AM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Melrose, MA
Posts: 961
|
Quote:
What really disturbs me is that I see the country trending Republican, thanks to all of the terrorist hoopla and the innane notion that a Democratic politician wouldn't be able to properly defend the country. That wouldn't be so bad, except that the GOP is in bed with the Xtians and the oil barons so not only are they going to push us into wars across the globe (under the guise of nation building and establishing democracy), but they're also never going to stop trying to pack the judiciary with people who think that the Ten Commandments belong in the courthouse, that schoolkids should be forced to say prayers, and that women should be incubators with no say in whether or not they want to be pregnant. I see nothing to indicate that Bush won't be reelected, and the best the Democrats can trot out is Leiberman, another religionist politico :banghead: (albeit much more palatable than the Xtian variety since Jews are much better at minding their own business and not trying to convert the rest of us). |
|
01-09-2003, 10:14 AM | #10 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 207
|
I know this guy who’s a militant atheist, and yet he is also a militant Republican. I haven’t been able to figure that out. With the GOP fully in bed with the Christian Coalition, how could anybody who cares one iota about the rights of non-Christians vote Republican? I have no particular love for the Democrats, and am conservative on many issues, but there is no way I could hold my nose hard enough to keep the stench of the Christian Right from seeping while voting Republican.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|