Ketanji can’t define what a woman is

No it is not. This is spiteful mutants with enormous power playing word games to subvert and demoralize Americans so they can be oppressed more easily. These are the type of games the Soviets played. The absurdity ALWAYS precedes the atrocity. There is no issue more important than this. If the elites are allowed to succeed with this outrage against reality and decency, the republic will fall. If any Republican votes to confirm this "person with a vagina", they should be voted out of office. She is the most radical progressive to ever be nominated.... she is a civilization destroyer.

 

Can Jackson define what a human is or does she need a legal argument to tell her?

 

lol, your disagreement with me is cultural.

I guess I'm desensitized to delusion given that I've been around Christians most of my life and I think they're all delusional. The bottom line is how each person lives their life isn't determined by my sense of how the world works. If somebody feels better by taking on the roles, mannerisms, and whatever they can do to be who they feel they are, I don't see the problem with it.

Paper money is a good example of something that is what it is precisely because people accept it as such. It's cultural. The problem with counterfeit bills is that it interferes with the functioning of "real" money. Somebody else being a trans female does not interfere with anything about my functioning as a man or natural-born women to function as women.

But there are clearly grey areas. For example, people with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome have XY chromosomes, but an immature female phenotype. They are genetically male, but physically closer to female. Which are they really? Usually they identify as women.

I think she was genuinely unsure of a good definition. She should have stopped to think about it like I did before getting that question, as it's not a biological question and very much in the realm of what a judge should be able to process given effort or asking people who understand these issues.

You jest, but the knowledge wouldn't be without value, it's just there are other issues that come with it like integrity that may not be resolvable to make them a good candidate.

Your post is a good example of how simple-minded conservatism has become. Well, maybe it always was. Basing an entire ideology on the fallacy of appeal to tradition isn't bound to produce intelligent policy positions.

 

There is more to life and freedom than law.

 

Its a very simple question. She calls herself a woman, ergo she should be able to define the term she used.

You want it to not be simple, simply because you don't like the answer.

 

Scientifically speaking? That’s actually not true. Children don’t have a firm grasp of gender until the age of six. We can see this in how kids misgender things (refer to people as one pronoun or another). So it’s actually not true that 3 year olds know what gender is.

 

Moreso because as someone who asks that question to myself a lot, I realized the answer is a lot more complicated. I mean, have you ever tried to prove you were your gender and have counter arguments ready in case someone challenges you? Probably not.

 

"Whatever people say they are"

No limits huh? Trans-racial, Tran-species, it's all OK.

 

Well I don't want to get in the way of the transification of the Democratic Party. Keep it up!

 

Why are you talking about birds. Birds are not "women".

Women is a female person.

Your attempt at relativism is failed by simple definitions.

 

LOL

Nobody is allowed to discuss the ridiculousness of progressivism because some guy around the globe is doing bad things.

How convenient.

 

So the Metoo movement was just a hoax?

lol.

Seeing the progressives back themselves into corners like this unable to explain their illogical stances is pure gold.

 

Oh? Well, if the "now and future generation" won't care, then WHY was it so double-damned important to all the Democrat 'Wokesters' that the next SCOTUS Justice is FEMALE and (of course) Black...?!

 

It's a "gotcha" only because it proves how illogical the platform is. She didn't handle it well, she skirted around it and deflected.

 

Crocodile Dundee knew exactly how to answer that question. Reach down there and check the plumbing!

 

Right! And, frankly, any empty-handed, doctrinaire moron who can't tell a man from a woman is not (NOT) someone you could seriously consider for a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States!

Hint: If nothing else, look at who has which chromosomes! You need not have majored in Biology to be able to do that!

 

Well she didn't want to answer truthfully in the common sense way she knew that she would in a sane world....

To do so would have risked being branded a "bigot" and alienating the further fringes of the Democratic party.... Which is becoming more mainstream.

It is now clown world, wonk wonk wonka wonka!

 

I knocked a woman up without technology. That should be proof enough for anyone.

 

Kajambee, or whatever the **** her name is, let the truth slip. By saying "I'm not a biologist" she reveals the unequivocal truth that sex is a matter of chromosomal distinction and not fee-fees. She thought she was being so clever, side stepping this question as to not piss off the far-left tranny obsessed progs that enabled her dark-money-funded elevation to nominee. Truth will out.

 

So... the conclusion is that we should have a Supreme Court Justice with the comprehension ability of, at most, A FIVE YEAR-OLD CHILD?! You 'wokesters' absolutely amaze me!

 

I read somewhere that 'Ketanji' is a Swahili word meaning, "too stupid to know what is between her legs"....

 

Pretty simple for most of us. And if not simple, a biology class should square things away.

 

Why should we stop at this foolishness, let's redefine everything in the world around us.

I declare North is now South if you don't agree with me you're a close-minded bigot!

And that thing people often refer to as the sky....? Well, that shall now forth be known as the ground!
Don't be a bigot against my beliefs or I'll lobby my congressman to create a law and if you violate it, have your ass thrown in jail!

 

Yes, sex is determined by what gametes a body produces. Gender is a social/cultural thing. Society and cultures change over time, no big deal. That is the way it has always been.

 

Nonsense. Simple minded- not at all. The basis, which is elemental to science as well as societies- is knowing the difference between constants and variables, and being able to maintain priorities- or orders of magnitude, where the most important issues are not preceded by lesser issues. Many people have a difficult time understanding this, sometimes this analogy helps.

First- the scope of most things consists of Constants, meaning factors that do not change and have always existed, and Variables- factors that change and have are created by circumstances or are things we have chosen. Constants are natural, variables generally man-made. If you were doing anything that involved calculations of curved things- volume of a cylinder, for example, the Constant is the mathematical element called Pi. As you calculate, all the other figures in the formula can vary and the result be correct, but if you alter the value of Pi, all the results will be wrong. Pi is not the only element of such a formula- but it is the constant and cannot be ignored of varied. That's not a choice.

Nature sets out certain constants in most areas, including biology, and even the ways we live. The latter is rarely understood by people, resulting in us fabricating variables and substituting them for constants- which is directly related to the high level of errors we make. Even among variables, stability and consistency in something like money requires us to designate a constant of sorts- a rule that we will agree on a certain value, such as only money produced by the US mint is legitimate and all others are counterfeit. If you put on a uniform and claim to be a pilot- you are not a pilot, you are a counterfeit.

In order to be competent in many things, you must have a reasonably good perception of values, and you must know the difference between the constants and the variables. With the exclusion of mutations, such as a calf being born with two heads, biology produces males and females. Being unable to make some definitive statement about these two fundamental states of human beings doesn't mean she has no grasp or understanding- it means she's dodging, evading taking a position. In this particular setting, she is applying for the position of judging all kinds of things, which will most likely include cases involving the current fads of making gender a fluid choice constant of nature- into an arbitrary and fluid choice of individuals- a variable. It's important not because someone might chose to pretend they have changed genders, but because those people intend for it to affect the rest of society in multiple ways; they seek to make an aberration of the individual an aberration of the entire society. She undoubtedly has an understanding of what a woman is- but shes not willing to share that, because she doesn't want to be tied to it.

I think a person on the supreme court must be grounded in the constants, and the laws. She's dodging commitment to a constant- and that in my opinion says she does not belong on that court.