- Local time
- Today, 14:56
- Feb 28, 2001
Actually, to a virulent member of the BLM movement, yes.
Clearly, to make the headlines, the Biden team purposely selected women to fill those jobs. There is no apparent pretense that the people being hired would be hired based solely on qualifications. So, if you clearly select people for a job based on certain criteria (such as gender) that is illegal. (Of course, no lawsuit will be filed against the Biden team by some men's rights group. It would be great if that were to actually happen. )How are they doing that?
It's more a case of relative justice. Democrats will only fight for so-called "civil rights" if they can manipulate that concept to promote their political agenda. (i.e. it's too incomprehensibly "difficult" to get voter id, therefore none should be required.)So the Democrats fight for and bring in Civil Rights laws only to break them later on?
Democrats circa 1960s probably actually believed in Civil Rights. However, since Obama, it appears that so-called "civil rights" has metastasized into: "I belong to ethnic group Z, therefore the government owes me special consideration". As @Isaac just crossed posted with me: "in these modern times, many people seem to think that the proper way to correct past discrimination is to implement MORE discrimination".Does that mean the Democrats never believed in equality in the first place?
Just FYI, men are raised by their mothers more frequently than by their fatherssince men are programmed to think along the lines of giving women what they ask for & want,
It is a first, at least in context. It's the first time a team (except for the early astronauts) was selected based entirely on their genitalia rather than their qualifications. At least there was a reason for wanting only male astronautsMedia Say Biden’s Female-Led Comms Team Is A First. It’s What Trump Has Now
No your comments are not ridiculous. We have relative morality (ethics). A case of massive cognitive dissonance inflamed by mob hysteria.Yes, I know my comments sound ridiculous.
...whose mission is to eradicate white supremacy and build local power to intervene in violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes
I think generally speaking, if our legal adversarial system is working properly, each side's attorney(s) use whatever tools they can to fight for the best jury selection possible (for their client), during jury selection. And I am sure skin color factors into it pretty often : )But how do you balance it? Based on skin colour? I'm curious over what they do