Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
what is with the conservative resistance to context?
|
I don't have a general resistance to context. Her statement is clear and stands on its own merits. Was she pandering, or does she believe personal bias should be accentuated rather than minimized as she sits in judgment? My take on this is not the standard right wing take that I have been hearing.
the problem with promoting one's race/gender/experiences is the risk of insulting those who are different. Her statement is inflammatory.
---------- Post added at 01:52 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:51 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by filtherton
I think the reason that it appears absurd to you is that you don't understand what she was talking about.
|
You don't know who or what I am, so what is your basis for that comment?
---------- Post added at 01:56 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by dippin
You mean like the rest of the actual speech where the sentence came from? If people are too lazy to read it here's the cliffnotes:
She was discussing the impact of increased minority and female participation in law, and discussed how every key case on discrimination, segregation and so on had a minority or female either judging or advocating the case. As such, he says that the idea that wise men and wise women reach the same wise decisions was false, because there are more than one definitions of what a wise decision is, and in this context of judging and discussing discrimination, a Latina woman with the experiences related to discrimination that come with the territory should (but will not necessarily) reach a wiser decision than a man who has never experienced that type of discrimination.
She then goes on to say that the real challenge is to know when that experience is biasing their judgment and when that experience is enriching it, and that no one should adopt the identity of the "Latin Judge" or whatever other minority.
Not at all different from what Alito said, but apparently the same people who are quick to deny even the possibility of racism elsewhere in this case are so hellbent as to ignore any and every shred of evidence that they are wrong. At no point does she say that minorities make better judges, and that in fact is entirely contradicted several times during that speech, which would make sense given that her entire point is that there are more than one possible wise decisions.
|
That is b.s. when it come to the law. Our goal is to live in a world where the law is truly blind. Her comment suggests we are making no progress in that regard. Are liberals throwing up the white (pardon the pun) flag on King's dream?
alito, indicated what I have said, that we all have biases, our goal with the law should be to minimize those biases.
---------- Post added at 02:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:56 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlatan
This is why context is important, rather than impotent.
|
How about an honest response to my question. was she pandering to her audience with her comment? That is a part of context as well as the words surrounding her comment.
How about an honest response to my comment that her statement was inflammatory? That is a part of our national context when it comes to race/gender issues.
Seems some want to pick and choose their "context" reference points. But I stand by the view that her comment was clear and stands on its own.
---------- Post added at 02:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:01 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaver
At first it made me wary, but after looking up many of her actual judicial decisions I don't see it actually arriving in her decisions. She's thrown out many racial discrimination lawsuits, and appears that she (for the most part) stays relatively unbiased. My only fear is keeping the court to decide impartially on current laws and not attempting to legislate from the bench, but I see no impact from this quote to show any evidence of that.
|
How many have involved female latina's? Isn't that the issue? In fact isn't her heritage very different than many others who are under the broader definition of term she used? In some cases the differences are very sharp ones.