Stuff
Stuff
Stuff
[/size]Other stuff
More stuff
My problem is the difference between a bias and a prejudice.
You are still not addressing my point.
That line is not even coming close to addressing what I said about how a non ideological supreme court is a nonsensical idea.
I'll type slowly....
A bias is a pre-existing favor for one side of an argument over the other. It is, as you
suggest, pretty much inevitable for a politically-appointed jurist, but it is still subject
to reasoned counter-argument. While the judge in question might lean particularly to
(for example) the political Right, he (or she) might be
persuaded that a
particular gun
control law does not unacceptably impede a citizen's 2nd Amendment rights, or that
this bit of anti-abortion law
is an unconstitutional intrusion on a woman's privacy...
A PREJUDICE... well, even if you've never taken Latin: pre + judice : prejudge....
Before the first brief has been filed, before any arguments have been presented, a majority
of the current court will have made up its mind, without any hope of its being changed, based
purely on the ideological slant of their 'patron' political party.
______________________________________________________
_________________________
This just in, possibly relevant to the above topic, if not this particular branch of it:
Remember the 60s, when "the black vote" went from the Republicans (Abe Lincoln's party)
to the Democrats (JFK) ? --- NO? Well, it happened....
It's starting to look like the Dems are going to hand "the gay vote" back to the GOP.
Note:
- homophobe Dem President- pushing for gay rights, but only using one hand 'cuz
he's holding his nose with the other.
-Republicans embracing a very fiscal-minded, small-government sort of rehtoric,
while moving social issues to the back burner...
-Powerful figures in the GOP either coming out or simply taking the stance that
a person's sexuality is nobody's business but their own.... and nobody says a
word about it (not like ten or fifteen years ago...)