Posted on 04/21/2006 8:06:46 AM PDT by Battle Hymn of the Republic
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced Thursday the appointment of a Mountain View woman to a judgeship with the Santa Clara County Superior Court.
Shawna M. Schwarz, 42, will fill the seat of retired Judge William F. Martin.
Schwarz has served as a commissioner to the Santa Clara Superior Court since 2001. She was previously the directing attorney for Legal Advocates for Children and Youth with the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley from 1995 to 2001.
Schwarz, a Democrat, earned a law degree from Santa Clara University, a Masters degree in Sociology from Stanford and a Bachelor of Arts degree from Stanford University.
The compensation for this position is $149,160.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
This guy leads a good, responsible life which is a darn site more than I can say for a slew of Conservatives that I could name and a bunch of folks on this board.
so let's put ALL judges through your very own, sanctioned, psychoanalytical tests before they can be judges. brilliant!
sheesh.
well what mental tests do you propose for all judges then? because i guess anyone on prozac is out, or fear of flying, or who does anything you don't like. maybe being a lawyer makes me a little less hysterical than you, there are good judges and bad judges and frankly, their sexual orientation plays little role in how most rule from the bench.
I assume it's your definition of "normal" that must be used?
If I had a case before a judge - I don't think what the judge does in bed would have much bearing on my case.
Do you ask your judge if they indulge in oral sex before you'll let them hear your case? To many - that would be considered a "disorder". To some, anything other than the missionary position for reasons of procreation is "not right". Do we determine our judges on that criteria?
If not, why not?
I've never understood why some folks get so worked up over somebody else's taste in sex. Do you care about their taste in food? Both sex and food are bodily functions - they both have people who have different tastes. Why is taste in sex so much more important than taste in sex?
It goes beyond what they do in bed. Clearly if they are driven to abuse their bodies for some warped and unnatural gratification then they have deeper mental disorders that should be addressed before they are to take on serious responsibilities. They are no different than people who gain sexual gratification from starting fires or killing animals.
Do you ask your judge if they indulge in oral sex before you'll let them hear your case?
No, but occasional unnatural behavior is a far cry from the "identity psyche" that drives mentally disturbed people such as homosexuals. If such a judge were to go around declaring himself as an "oralsexual" person and marched in parades with oral sex themes, and placed stickers on his car and demanded that government teach children in schools about his unnatural sexual practices, then yes that would concern me.
I've never understood why some folks get so worked up over somebody else's taste in sex. Do you care about their taste in food? Both sex and food are bodily functions
Again their disturbed behavior transcends "taste" in sexual positions. And yes, I would care about their taste in food if they went around eating rocks or drinking motor oil. Such things might not kill them but would likely make them sick (the way homosexual sex does). Such behavior would also be indicative of a disturbed person whom I wouldn't want to serve as a superior court judge.
"Clearly if they are driven to abuse their bodies for some warped and unnatural gratification..."
what do lesbians do to abuse their bodies?
"starting fires or killing animals."
hmm, starting fires destroys property and puts lives in jeopardy. killing animals, well, kills them. being a lesbian...um, i'm lost. one of these things is not like the others.
not surprised of the pro-homo response here at FR as this planet turns dangerously more liberal...
I am unhappy over liberal activist judges, but her sexual orientation doesn't bother me in the least. If Tammy Bruce were on the bench, I'd cheer. If I got sent to her courtroom, I'd know I was in fair hands.
Pay attention.
My point was that superfical observations of neighbors, observations you submitted, are by no means sufficient to declare a diagnosis of a clean bill of mental health. The people of Wichita made similar observations and clearly their neighbor was in fact sick and twisted. I'm not suggesting your neighbors are mass murderers. However they probably do have all kinds of psychological problems related to their disordered behavior.
They always have had those disorders. It's just been politcally incorrect to mention in recent years. And yes, people with mental orders should not serve as judges.
Yikes! What a thread!
Gay Lobby meets Free Republic?
I think some of those same DUers are posting on this thread.
If this judge has done that - then I would agree with you. However just the fact that she is homosexual should not have anything to do with her ability to do her job.
"They"? Guess what - all homosexuals are not a unified block that does and think alike. If this particular judge is trying to "force it on our families" - then I agree with you. But just the fact that she is homosexual does not mean she is an activist.
I know people who are vegetarians. I also know people who are violent PETA activists. They shouldn't be lumped together as though they are exactly the same.
Homosexuals are cops, firemen, factory workers, lawyers, football players, doctors and everything else under the sun. They are also liberals, conservatives, libertarians and everything in between.
You cannot say that "they" are all alike and that "they" all have the same agenda, no more that all blacks are alike, or all Jews are alike, or all people who shave their heads are all alike.
That's a liberal ploy. You would think that conservatives, if anyone, should know that individuals should be treated and judged as individuals - not as a unified group.
I'd be willing to bet any amount of money you want to name, that there are people you know that are homosexuals and you would have absolutely no idea. Many of them are married men with wives and children - they could be your mailman or your local grocer. Not all homosexuals march around with limp wrists waving rainbow flags.
I knew a homosexual man years ago that was a professional football player ( I won't mention the team - because I promised him I never would). You would not think in a million years that this man liked sex with men. You can't judge a book by its cover.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.