Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Sexism On The Bench???

Interesting, this ruling.

“It is unfortunate that any woman in Ms. MacLeod's situation may be regarded as less reliable because of the demands placed on her life as a politician,” said Nancy Peckford, national director of Equal Voice, an organization promoting women in public office. “Would the same approach have been taken with a male politician who is commuting and has a young family at home? Probably not.”

On Monday, Ms. MacLeod, the Conservative MPP for Nepean-Carleton, called the judge's reference “pathetic” and “surreal.”

“I didn't know truth had a gender or a family,” she said.

Is it a sexist ruling? Aren't we supposed to trust all judges? Or just Leftist ones?

Perhaps if Ms. MacLeod had been, instead of a wise white woman, a wise Latina woman... like Sonia Sotomayor, the judge might've ruled more favorably as to her reliability as a witness... Hell, maybe it's a racist thing, actually, and the judge in the case above didn't think wise white women could be reliable witnesses compared to their Latina counterparts...

It's a shame that Judge Sonia Sotomayor, the Obama nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, chose not to defend her statement “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life” at her nomination hearings this week.

Well, now that we have a known sexist and racist on the Supreme Court of the U.S. (Sotomayor has been confirmed, thanks to the pussy-ish RINO Congress and Senate members, not to mention the Democrats and, of course, Obama)...

Just witness the outrage and consternation at the sexist ruling made by the Canadian judge.

And foresee the sexist, racist rulings Sonia Sotomayor is likely to make as a SCOTUS judge. After all, why did the ultra-extreme Left-wing Obama pick her, of all possible candidates? If not for her extremely Left-wing ideology, activist orientation and history? Perhaps I'm prejudging her future rulings? But then again, isn't Sotomayor guilty of prejudice? Isn't the Canadian judge? How do we know, anyway? Of course, Sotomayor's past rulings, I've taken into account, like the racist ruling in the case of the firefighters who were discriminated against for their skin color, so I don't think I'm prejudging at all... just post-judging, y'know, making a judgement "a-posteriori", as opposed to one "a-priori".

Hell, perhaps the Canadian judge just isn't fit, simply because he's a "white male"? Wonder if Sotomayor would suggest that she, not he, would have made a better ruling?