[Just mythoughts]

" She's a perfect example of what they want- a career oriented power woman who didn't let herself get held back by outdated and patristic shackles such as "family" and "children"."


Where is it written that "women" are by definition required to marry and bare children?

[alessandrofiaschi]

She is a perfect example of Bush' liberal-oriented petrol-lawyers!

[cyborg]

Women don't have to be but it is the feminist ideal to be encumbered by a husband and children. If she had a child (and didn't put it in a day care) she may not be a SC nominee today but a 'plain old housewife'. I can't tell you how many times career women have pulled me aside and asked me what I'm going to do about my education after I get married.

[cyborg]

Of course I meant to say 'not to be'. I personally don't care whether she's married or not. Hillary was married and she was a horror.

[freedumb2003]

Where is it written that "women" are by definition required to marry and bare children?

Is that anything like the right to bare arms?

[veronica]

Where is it written that "women" are by definition required to marry and bare children?

The she's-not-married-must-be-gay haironfire crowd reminds me of Dianne Feinstein begging Roberts to tell her how he feels as a man. What does that have to do with interpreting the law?