• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What is the definition of a "Woman"?

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Sen. Blackburn slams Judge Jackson on definition of 'woman' (nypost.com)

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson and GOP Sen. Marsha Blackburn sparred over questions of sex and gender during the second day of Jackson’s Senate confirmation hearing late Tuesday, with the Supreme Court nominee begging off defining the word “woman” because she is not a “biologist.”

The two women, who clashed over abortion and transgender rights before the Senate Judiciary Committee, delved into the definition during a discussion of the Supreme Court’s 1996 decision striking down the Virginia Military Institute’s male-only admission policy on the grounds it violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.

Blackburn (R-Tenn.) pointed out that the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the court’s opinion in the case and stated that “supposed inherent differences are no longer accepted as a ground for race or national origin classifications.”

The senator asked Jackson: “Do you agree with Justice Ginsburg that there are physical differences between men and women that are enduring?”

“Senator, respectfully, I am not familiar with that particular quote or case, so it’s hard for me to comment as to whether or not …,” Jackson began before Blackburn interjected.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The new supreme court nomination of Biden Ketanji Brown Jackson can not answer this question.
I don't blame her. It's a definition that's currently evolving.
But neither do I buy her answer....
“Not in this context. I’m not a biologist,”

Her answer doesn't address the complexities of context....
Biological?
Under case law?
Under legislated law?
Under the Constitution?
Under sports governing bodies' laws?

And the complexities of definition....
Chromosomes?
Hormone levels?
Brain orientation?
Transition status?

Of course, she's being questioned by politicians, who are
notorious for ignorance, prejudice, stupidity, & mischief.
Simplistic answers might suit them best.

Were I up there answering such an emotionally charged
question, I'd first bring up the various complexities. Then
state that changing contexts & standards would require
research to answer each one individually & thoughtfully.
Finally, for those reasons, I'd demur. And add that legal
opinions should not be tossed about hurriedly. One can
speak about cases one has handled, but not so easily
about hypotheticals.
 
Last edited:

Aštra’el

Aštara, Blade of Aštoreth
The difference between a man and a woman, in the wise words of Keith and Kevin Hodge:

“You either got **** and balls or sugarwalls”
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
db740917.gif
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Revoltingest you are not a nomination for a supreme court Judge! She could not answer... Even your answer would have been a answer for her to give!
I say she answered reasonably.
Just not as well as I would've.
But then, not everyone is as smart as I am.
My IQ is nearly 70 (on a good day).
 
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
In the full context of the US Constitution & applicable law?
If indeed you can, I'll nominate you for SCOTUS.

Note:
Just like amusement park rides, there's a height requirement.
Justice chambers have this sign....
R.474a364eabf08e7d305535e663706caf
 

Audie

Veteran Member
In the full context of the US Constitution & applicable law?
If indeed you can, I'll nominate you for SCOTUS.

Note:
Just like amusement park rides, there's a height requirement.
My "27" should anser that.

Anyway, ' round here we dont get confused about simple things like " what is a man / woman".
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
My "27" should anser that.

Anyway, ' round here we dont get confused about simple things like " what is a man / woman".
We're more sophisticated here in Ameristan.
Tis not as simple as checking someone's drawers for shapes.
 
Top