Hmm. I appreciate your point, but I don't think most citizens consider any one Justice worth making such a gesture. It's too broad of a body. Much easier, as I'm sure Booth surmised, to take out the point at the top of the pyramid.
I do wish there were a better way to remove Justices, but there isn't & there won't be any time soon.
If there was a way to remove justices, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer and possibly O'Connor would have been removed in 2001. As much as I'd like to Scalia, Alito and Thomas gone (not so sure about Roberts), I think I prefer the current system.
I would have supposed most transgender people are like SF fen: they have learned to expect stupidity and would find its absence jarring, like a top step that isn't there.
(Unless I have misunderstood your intent, in which case I'm almost sure the algae don't really care.)
Well, it's not like I'm not surprised that mainstream journalists have gotten this all twisted. However, as a committed ally, I find it utterly offensive for "transgender" to be equated with "intersex" on a biological scale. They are not the same by any means socially, so to use either as a shorthand in journalistic headlines bothers me. Very much.
Comments 7
I worry that these decisions will, within my lifetime, bring someone to realize this and take action.
Reply
I do wish there were a better way to remove Justices, but there isn't & there won't be any time soon.
Reply
More importantly, that could result in decisions that affect generations.
Reply
Reply
(Unless I have misunderstood your intent, in which case I'm almost sure the algae don't really care.)
Reply
Reply
I'm with you in spirit.
Reply
Leave a comment