‘How Badly Do We Need “Openly Gay” Judges?’ (2013)

See the source image

You didn’t think I was going to post a picture of a “gay” judge, did you? And on a Sunday, no less. But we did have a deer in our yard this morning.

To the best of my knowledge–maybe the nooze media covered it up–the Obama administration never quite got around to imposing this abomination on us.

How Badly Do We Need ‘Openly Gay’ Judges?

But they wanted to. Oh, yeah, they wanted to. “Openly gay” federal judges. As if the flagrant practice of sodomy were a qualification for a federal judgeship.

Please, please, do not ever again let Democrats seize control of the country.

8 comments on “‘How Badly Do We Need “Openly Gay” Judges?’ (2013)

  1. It astounds me that the segment of society that rushes to call others bigots and accuses them of discrimination are so open in their practice of discrimination. Judges should be appointed on their qualifications and their record of applying the law equally, not on their demographics. A judge with true integrity, will put all personal considerations aside and judge only according to the law, never going beyond the law. Verdicts, rulings and sentences should never be based upon anything but the law itself. Pursuing judges from certain demographics, no matter what those demographics may be, is an insult to the law.

  2. Seems nobody is concerned about real equality these days. It is only that their own view point is the only one considered fair and balanced. The extent of hypocrisy is amazing, and the blindness even more.

    1. In modern libspeak, “equality” means the supremacy of this or that Cherished Minority over normal people.

  3. I’m really tired of people flaunting their sex lives and demanding applause for doing so. What happened to the old whine about “privacy” and the sovereignty of “what people do in their own bedrooms”? Now they insist on doing it — and endlessly describing it — in public, whether we want to hear about it or not.

    A friend of mine and I, both of us opera buffs, were just complaining recently about what’s become of the magazine “Opera News,” which is now more about singers’ and composers’ sex lives than about their music, and has more reviews of new so-called Operas With Messages about sex and politics than of standard-repertory performances and recordings — unless the classic operas are “updated” to deliver said Messages, often with little regard for the libretto. Oh, and I say “so-called” about most of the new operas because they don’t seem to have much memorable music, just a lot of accompanied rant.

    1. Somehow the idea of new, contemporary operas totally puts me off. “Updated” classical operas sounds like an atrocious idea, too. You just know they’re gonna be awful. The horror, the horror…

Leave a Reply