Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Amy J who wrote (242317)	7/20/2005 8:03:33 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573678

When man after man is selected, and statistically it is out of whack with the number of candidates, that is why I bring it up. Got it? Well that's different, share with us your knowledge. What the sexual split of the potential candidates? Assuming he is going to pick an experienced judge in a senior position, what's the sexual split of that group? Personally, I have no idea. the courts have ruled already (lower courts of course, where there is diversity), they have ruled that STATISTICS prove sexism. Courts have recently ruled that any corporation that has its statistics out of whack is proof of sexims. Great, then the court system will be used to prevent sexism in corporations. I'm in favor of that. As for the Supreme Court, I think you have too small a success pool (9 judges, about one new one every three years) to satisfy all sexism, racism, age, height and hair/eye color groups....

To: Amy J who wrote (242317)	7/20/2005 11:26:13 AM
From: d[-_-]b	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573678

Amy, re:When man after man is selected, and statistically it is out of whack with the number of candidates, that is why I bring it up. Got it? Perhaps he should have appointed an illegal alien - to balance things out. Seriously I doubt they expected this retirement and had a man lined up to replace a man. If and when he gets another vacancy you may have more of a point.

To: Amy J who wrote (242317)	7/20/2005 7:00:53 PM
From: steve harris	Respond to of 1573678

Push them quotas baby! Would you want a quota produced woman surgeon or the best surgeon to operate on you?

To: Amy J who wrote (242317)	7/20/2005 8:04:25 PM
From: steve harris	Respond to of 1573678

Amy, you want to play statistics? Barbara Boxer says 5000 women will die if Roe vs Wade is overturned. Doesn't saving 1500000 lives by losing 5000 lives sound acceptable to you? therevolutionwillbeblogged.blogspot.com

To: Amy J who wrote (242317)	7/21/2005 8:41:05 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573678

You are advocating a totally sexist methodology in Supreme Court. Advocating not taking sex into account is the exact opposite of being sexist. and just in case you don't get it, let me be crystal clear about how the courts have ruled already (lower courts of course, where there is diversity), they have ruled that STATISTICS prove sexism. Courts don't determine facts. They may recognize facts. They may fail to recognize facts. They interpret law. Sometimes they interpret in a way that has little to do with the words of the law or the intentions of the people who wrote the law. None of which means that a lower court ruling, or even a supreme court ruling should be taken as evidence for something like the idea that simple overall statistics about the % of people in each position compared to the percentage of the same group in the general population process sexism. I suppose the fact that whites are underrepresented in the major professional sports leagues (as a whole, and in every one if you don't count hockey as being major), and that there isn't a single woman in any of the top leagues means that sports leagues are bigoted against whites and women. Of course that isn't the case but the type of analysis that you are applying to the supreme courts composition would come to that conclusion. 101 about diversity means a representation of different POVs. So the press and academia and the NAACP and the Democratic party should all look to get a lot more conservatives and libertarians in their group so that these diverse POV can be represented? Tim