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.

Pastimes : Thread Morons -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (12124)	7/20/2005 8:38:23 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Respond to of 12810

the point was made in the context of 'women representing' women on the court, the discussion centered around the fact (one i was making) that men are perfectly capable of representing 'women's interests' as women are capable of representing 'men's interests' his statement was: A man who, while otherwise immensely qualified, would be nearly CERTAIN to vote to overturn Roe V. Wade if given the opportunity. the obvious point being a judicial panel comprised entirely of men ruled ostensibly in favor of 'women's interests' in the case of roe v. wade (depending on one's political pov) res ipsa loquitur