Gun ownership poll

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

These are all good and fair points. My opinion is that, generally, we have too many old rich men deciding things in this country.

Do all old men (for example, Breyer and Alito) think the same way? Do all women (for instance Barrett and Sotomayor) think the same way? Can't women be fair and clear thinking when it comes to the law, and vice versa?

Your comment is sexist.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Do all old men (for example, Breyer and Alito) think the same way? Do all women (for instance Barrett and Sotomayor) think the same way? Can't women be fair and clear thinking when it comes to the law, and vice versa?

None of these questions have anything to do with my comment.

Originally Posted by Mark17

Your comment is sexist.

Please explain.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Please explain.

You said:

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

These are all good and fair points. My opinion is that, generally, we have too many old rich men deciding things in this country.

Why? Aren't "rich old men" fair? Are women, or poor, young men, more fair? Assigning people into groups based on age, gender, race, or any other such attribute, and then painting that entire group and everyone in it with a broad brush, is sexism, or ageism, or racism, or just plain prejudice and bigotry.

You are making a derogatory comment about a certain age and gender group. If you don't like a decision made by a Neil Gorsuch or Sam Alito, try punching a hole in their argument. But why bring age and gender into it, as though those things are relevant?

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Mark17

You said:



Why? Aren't "rich old men" fair? Are women, or poor, young men, more fair? Assigning people into groups based on age, gender, race, or any other such attribute, and then painting that entire group and everyone in it with a broad brush, is sexism, or ageism, or racism, or just plain prejudice and bigotry.

You are making a derogatory comment about a certain age and gender group. If you don't like a decision made by a Neil Gorsuch or Sam Alito, try punching a hole in their argument. But why bring age and gender into it, as though those things are relevant?

A broad variety of perspectives from all different races, ages and genders leads to better outcomes. Almost all Fortune 500 companies, for example, have concluded this. Some still resist the concept.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Carter08

A broad variety of perspectives from all different races, ages and genders leads to better outcomes. Almost all Fortune 500 companies, for example, have concluded this. Some still resist the concept.

it more about diversity of opinion than just diversity based on gender and age......

i do think there should be extra pay for a qualified 'armed' teacher and a back up when that teacher is not there...having one officer and one teacher makes it difficult to take the campus by surprise by killing the one lone guard etc..

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Mark17

You said:



Why? Aren't "rich old men" fair? Are women, or poor, young men, more fair? Assigning people into groups based on age, gender, race, or any other such attribute, and then painting that entire group and everyone in it with a broad brush, is sexism, or ageism, or racism, or just plain prejudice and bigotry.

You are making a derogatory comment about a certain age and gender group. If you don't like a decision made by a Neil Gorsuch or Sam Alito, try punching a hole in their argument. But why bring age and gender into it, as though those things are relevant?

I'm not sure why you keep referencing specific supreme court justices. My comment is not a criticism of any particular individuals nor of their work/beliefs/views. "Fairness" has nothing to do with it either.

You are free to disagree, but my view is that America would be a better place if decisions were more often made by people and groups comprising a more diverse range of (to quote you) "ages, genders, races" as well as other orientations/experiences.

If you are perfectly happy and satisfied with the state of America, then I can understand your not wanting to change anything in this regard.

[Deertick]

Vax "mandates" were not forcing someone to do something against their will. It was the definition of "choice". Get a vaccine to protect society at large, or find another job, just not on the government teat.

[G1911]

I also am very happy the Supreme Court consists of people from multiple races and both genders. Clarence Thomas' take down of Dred Scott in this decision and his declaration that rights apply to all Americans is particularly resonant.

Or is this not the diversity we like, because he has the wrong opinion?

Of course, when valid arguments can no longer be found, it is the response to try and make it about race and gender, even though it was authored by an African-American male and a woman's addition to the Court is what made it a clear majority (many of us are surprised that Roberts signed on with this).

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by G1911

I also am very happy the Supreme Court consists of people from multiple races and both genders. Clarence Thomas' take down of Dred Scott in this decision and his declaration that rights apply to all Americans is particularly resonant.

Or is this not the diversity we like, because he has the wrong opinion?

Of course, when valid arguments can no longer be found, it is the response to try and make it about race and gender, even though it was authored by an African-American male and a woman's addition to the Court is what made it a clear majority (many of us are surprised that Roberts signed on with this).

No one said the Supreme Court isn’t currently diverse, and it takes half a brain to argue it is, although it is politically motivated and that has almost always been the case. It’s the state legislatures in states that will now be deciding what women/women of color can and cannot do with their bodies that are historically underrepresented.

Side note: accused sexual abusers as the paragon of conservative virtue is fairly ironic.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Do all old men (for example, Breyer and Alito) think the same way? Do all women (for instance Barrett and Sotomayor) think the same way? Can't women be fair and clear thinking when it comes to the law, and vice versa?

Your comment is sexist.

I agree..its like saying all old men think alike.. like all people of a racial group think the same as some monolithic group....its very offensive to say someone will think one way just because of the color of their skin or their gender...

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I agree..its like saying all old men think alike.. like all people of a racial group think the same as some monolithic group....its very offensive to say someone will think one way just because of the color of their skin or their gender...

When you have homogeneous groups of privileged men making the decisions, you end up with things like ( to remain true to the topic of the constitution) black people being considered property, and women being denied the right to vote. Or, to use a baseball example, allowing only white people to play major league baseball.

I'm sorry you were offended - try and imagine for a moment that you were not in that priveliged group! You would experience a lifetime of offenses that might give you a different perspective on things.