Alabama Court Awards Fetus the Right to Sue

[GMDino]

(05-28-2019, 09:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You still haven't showed me where i said Hispanics are not a minority

You still haven't showed where i consider Hispanics to be non-white

(05-28-2019, 02:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Not really sure what's racist about MY POV, but don't let that stop you.

I suppose if you consider Hispanic to be non-white. But let's not try to compare the two, because there is none. 

I simply provided a reason why he would consider aborting a child because of race akin to Eugenics. He was a direct descendent from  American Slaves and lost his house to fire as a child. He may have a more severe outlook on the matter than you, I, or RBG. 

You brought Thomas and his race into the conversation.

You don't want to "compare" any other minority to Thomas.

The SC decided to not hear the case. Thomas dragged his race into it. Other minorities did not.

Thomas doesn't care about the race and sex of the fetus. He cares about what his religion tells him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Thomas

Quote:As of 2007, Thomas was the justice most willing to exercise judicial review of federal statutes, but among the least likely to overturn state statutes.[138] According to a The New York Times editorial, "from 1994 to 2005 ... Justice Thomas voted to overturn federal laws in 34 cases and Justice Scalia in 31, compared with just 15 for Justice Stephen Breyer."[139]

In the 2009 Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder case, Thomas was the sole dissenter, voting in favor of throwing out Section Five of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Section Five requires states with a history of racial voter discrimination—mostly states from the old South—to get Justice Department clearance when revising election procedures. Although Congress had reauthorized Section Five in 2006 for another 25 years, Thomas said the law was no longer necessary, pointing out that the rate of black voting in seven Section Five states was higher than the national average. Thomas said "the violence, intimidation and subterfuge that led Congress to pass Section 5 and this court to uphold it no longer remains."[140] He again took this position in Shelby County v. Holder, voting with the majority and concurring with the reasoning which struck down Section Five.[141]

Quote:On occasion, however, Thomas has disagreed with free speech claimants. For example, he dissented in Virginia v. Black, a case that struck down part of a Virginia statute that banned cross burning. Concurring in Morse v. Frederick, he argued that the free speech rights of students in public schools are limited.[145] In Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, he joined the majority opinion that Texas's decision to deny a request for a Confederate Battle Flag specialty license plate is constitutional.[146]

Quote:Thomas believes that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids consideration of race, such as race-based affirmative action or preferential treatment. In Adarand Constructors v. Peña, for example, he wrote "there is a 'moral [and] constitutional equivalence' between laws designed to subjugate a race and those that distribute benefits on the basis of race in order to foster some current notion of equality. Government cannot make us equal; it can only recognize, respect, and protect us as equal before the law. That [affirmative action] programs may have been motivated, in part, by good intentions cannot provide refuge from the principle that under our Constitution, the government may not make distinctions on the basis of race."[169]

In Gratz v. Bollinger, Thomas said that, in his view, "a State's use of racial discrimination in higher education admissions is categorically prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause."[170] In Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, Thomas joined the opinion of Chief Justice Roberts, who concluded that "[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."[171] Concurring, Thomas wrote that "if our history has taught us anything, it has taught us to beware of elites bearing racial theories," and charged that the dissent carried "similarities" to the arguments of the segregationist litigants in Brown v. Board of Education.[171]

In Grutter v. Bollinger, he approvingly quoted Justice Harlan's Plessy v. Ferguson dissent: "Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens."[172] In a concurrence in Missouri v. Jenkins (1995), he wrote that the Missouri District Court "has read our cases to support the theory that black students suffer an unspecified psychological harm from segregation that retards their mental and educational development. This approach not only relies upon questionable social science research rather than constitutional principle, but it also rests on an assumption of black inferiority."[173]

So his use of his "race" as cover for his religious beliefs is laughable as is your citation and defense of it while ignoring any OTHER minority opinion on the subject at hand.