Why can't democrats define "woman?"

Why can't democrats define "woman?"

Attached: foifojjsjf.jpg (1200x630, 60.03K)

Democrats are chuds who have never seen a woman 😒

because they're trolling rightoids

Because it's a fucking gotcha question with no perfect answer. The more answer she gives the more conservatards will break it down and build it back up as some kind of ultra-liberal atheist leftist end of times response. Fox News will take a single word and take it out of context and turn it into proof she's the antichrist.

he doesn't know

there's a perfect answer as it applies to law. it would be a very simple answer and probably taken from published precedent. that's how law works. i don't expect you to understand that because we're not all lawyers or being interviewed to become a supreme court justice, but a lot of common people know that.

this isn't about politics. it's about how law works. if a lawyer doesn't cite precedent to define something, then what the fuck does anything mean? a judge would know about previous legal declarations. she didn't say that she didn't know of a legal definition, she said she didn't know a biological definition, because she wasn't a biologist. she wasn't interviewing to be a biologist, she was interviewing to be a judge on the supreme court.

she's a stupid fucking piece of shit.

This. Republicans never make good-faith arguments and shouldn't be listened to.

Plato did nothing wrong

kys nigger

because they know better than to make such a statement in a nomination hearing where you'll use it as a "gotcha" line to push for out of context for the next 20 years.

woman - female human

not a hard question.

Not really, it would depend on the context it’s being used in. There’s huge divides about how judges interpret what words mean and a lot of that is because lawmakers aren’t lawyers and write bad laws leaving the judges to have to interpret them.

Conservative judges are most often textualists who will just interpret the literal definition of what things are saying, often citing to a dictionary, past dicta, and plain-text meanings.

Other judges use more leeway trying to interpret the spirit of the law, looking at things like notes and transcripts of hearings and debates leading to the passage of the law to get a better idea of congress’ intent.

A judges job isn’t to randomly define words on the spot it’s a ridiculous gotcha question to get cheap a soundbite / votes

because there's no such thing as a woman unless I'm pretending to be one

Same reason Republicans can't acknowledge that Trump lost the election. America is held hostage by plutocrat-backed extremists.

>she didn't say that she didn't know of a legal definition, she said she didn't know a biological definition, because she wasn't a biologist. she wasn't interviewing to be a biologist, she was interviewing to be a judge on the supreme court.
>she's a stupid fucking piece of shit.

While you make a good point, it's less than she's stupid (she sidestepped it in a political way) than the whole left's ideology is stupid.

From a logical standpoint, most Americans have a libertarian approach that if someone wants to identify as a woman, in most areas, live and let live. But there's some areas that need boundaries. Instead of recognizing those boundaries, the left pushes through them by 1) claiming that if you oppose those you're bigoted, and 2) trying to claim that identifying as a woman and being a biological woman are the same thing, which is bullshit. She can't give a straight answer because of those two tenets of the Left's ideology.

Why can't Republicans stop drunkenly raping women?

because she's a diversity hire

Attached: rN8KgFN.jpg (1024x782, 236.42K)

"Woman" is not a word that needs a judge or biologist to define it, you dumb faggots.

I get it, but it’s such a stupid line of questioning for a Supreme Court nominee. Rather than getting to judicial philosophy or jurisprudence, they decided to make it a day long Tucker Carlson episode. You could see Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham getting giddy thinking about how many of their soundbites would be on boomer radio the next day.

She could a blown them all away with a simple answer instead the retarded shit that fell out of her mouth.

>leaving the judges to have to interpret them.
Cool, I can now literally take any tranny to court to prove he is a "woman" before he enters into a converstaion with me.

>very simple answer and probably taken from published precedent
If there is only a single precedent it's simple. As notes it needs to be put into a legal context in order to determine relevance of a given precedent.

I still don't think it's a 'gotcha' even though the Fox Entertainment would make a show out of any response. Although it was neither the time nor the place to bring up that bullshit discussion and she replied laudably. Go ask a biologist means she refers to objective evaluation not subjective. In other words trans men are still women. It simply was not possible to say it more directly

the supreme court is extremely succinct and simple. if she doesn't know how to play the game of defining a concept in 10 words, then she's no good. what, should we give her a fucking job for LIFE, with endless, guaranteed salary if she's going to bumble around with bullshit, not knowing how to end the argument in 10 seconds? that's how the supreme court does it.

Exactly. They have resorted to antagonistic trolling instead of actually doing something for America. At this point, I think all sane individuals can agree that anyone who is a Trump-Republican deserves to be shot between the eyes. Right after they are forced to watch their entire family raped and mutilated.

lol and what are your qualifications?

Why's the blond guy brown?

Remember when the last guy cried like a little bitch because he loves beer so much?

>lawmakers aren't lawyers

a lot of them have law degrees, which is partly why many laws get pages and pages of material

But our society is fucked if its turned over to politicians, lawyers, and lawmakers who debate the definition of the simplest of concepts. Some things need to be definitive. Night, day. Stop, go (stoplights). Male, female. If everything can be anything than nothing is set at all.

Because the tranny problem is still developing and poking it right now is detrimental to their voter base.