Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: k2blader; tame

Well, Thomas was chief of the EEOC. I wonder if even one decision ever came out during his tenure that was supportive of a gay person's claim. I'd be surprised if there wasn't. Would that have made Thomas unfit?


67 posted on 08/04/2005 8:58:04 AM PDT by republicofdavis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]


To: republicofdavis; k2blader
Well, Thomas was chief of the EEOC. I wonder if even one decision ever came out during his tenure that was supportive of a gay person's claim. I'd be surprised if there wasn't. Would that have made Thomas unfit?

Roberts was apparently doing pro bono work for the gay "rights" group, which seems to be a BIG difference in itself.

69 posted on 08/04/2005 9:59:36 AM PDT by tame (Are you willing to be as SHAMELESS for the truth as leftists are for a lie?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: republicofdavis

About the possibility that Thomas might have ruled in favor of a gay party at EEOC -- that's an apples-and-oranges comparison. It is completely possible that a gay might have a valid, factually sustained complaint under federal law. The Supreme Court ruling was a gross misinterpretation of the Constitution -- a terrible example of judicial activism -- and Roberts helped to bring it about.


81 posted on 08/04/2005 1:56:58 PM PDT by California Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson