Article

2020-02-11 Government

Comments From The Activist Ginsburg Bench - 'Equal Rights Amendment Would Herald Perfection'

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Besoeker 2020-02-11 00:00|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 Who needs legislative bodies when we have these black robed tyrants ?

Posted by Besoeker 2020-02-11 00:13|| 2020-02-11 00:13|| Front Page Top

#2 The case for racial equality is much stronger than the case for gender equality.
(Clue: Men and women are biologically different.)

Posted by Lex 2020-02-11 00:27|| 2020-02-11 00:27|| Front Page Top

#3 Senile old bat, like Pelosi.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2020-02-11 03:02|| 2020-02-11 03:02|| Front Page Top

#4 Equal in what ways?

Treatment by the state?

In group or individual?

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2020-02-11 05:57|| 2020-02-11 05:57|| Front Page Top

#5 It failed. It failed as the Founders intended the process to work. Instead of accepting the intent of their work, you have been twisting and mangling the 14th Amendment to achieve what was Constitutionally rejected. That's why we are now in social turmoil with all sorts of 'rights' proclaimed by so many self identified special interest groups and perversions. Get your f'ing finger out of social engineering the culture.

Posted by Procopius2k 2020-02-11 06:56|| 2020-02-11 06:56|| Front Page Top

#6 I think her notions of equality were best demonstrated in the decision concerning the Virginia Military Institute. In the penultimate paragraph she expounds at somewhat purple length about having never seen, read, heard of anything so grossly unfair as excluding women from the Institute.

But it is her final paragraph that shines a beacon on the intellect of this harridan who incidentally once advocated looking to 'other countries such as Zimbabwe for legal guidance'. Yes, the final paragraph is where she warns there could be something even worse than excluding women.

What pray tell could that be? Why, obviously it would be admitting women and then expecting them to perform the same tasks as their male counterparts to the same standards. THAT is what she considers equality. One might have to don the chem suit and actually plumb the depths of 'The View' to find this Quaker Oats level of mental acuity.

Posted by Cesare 2020-02-11 07:47|| 2020-02-11 07:47|| Front Page Top

#7 Ref #5: Less than 100 words, but profoundly correct.

Posted by Besoeker 2020-02-11 07:50|| 2020-02-11 07:50|| Front Page Top

#8 I am often, these days, reminded of one of the locutions of an old respected Democrat in the Senate about the dangers inherent in "defining deviancy down."

I figure that DPM has to be rotating in his grave at almost warp speed by now.

Posted by AlanC 2020-02-11 13:00|| 2020-02-11 13:00|| Front Page Top

#9 Equal Rights Amendment? When I first heard that many years ago I started laughing. The first step would be declaring all, repeat all gender specific law null and void. For example: what happens when all of the divorce, child custody, et cetera case law get tossed into the shredder? What about conscription? The differences in sentencing between male and female criminals. The list seems endless...

No, "Some animals are more equal than others" - George Orwell, and the ERA was a hypocritical power grab by some groups from the onset. If "Judge" Ruth Bader Ginsburg worships at that altar she lies when she claims to be an impartial jurist.

Posted by magpie 2020-02-11 20:07|| 2020-02-11 20:07|| Front Page Top

23:51 Guillibaldo and Tenille4557
23:41 gorb
23:32 Woodrow
23:30 Woodrow
23:19 Woodrow
22:44 trailing wife
22:17 Frank G
21:55 Cesare
21:28 Skidmark
21:21 Lex
21:14 Lex
21:13 Lex
20:24 John Frum
20:07 magpie
20:03 jpal
19:52 Alaska Paul
19:48 Herb McCoy
19:45 Ho Chi Darling of the Giants5137
19:45 Frank G
19:44 Lex
19:42 Lex
19:40 Lex
19:25 Lex
19:16 Zhang Fei