As per Bruce’s recent post on the allegations of Elaine Kagan’s sexuality, basically the nub of what I have to say is that we have more important things to discuss, especially about this woman’s qualifications, than to question her sexuality as some juvenile left-wing bloggers want to do.
Her sexuality is irrelevant to her ability to serve on the Supreme Court. And we shouldn’t be making an issue of it.
If she is a lesbian and wishes to keep this matter private, that’s her business. If she’s not, then we’ve got a lot of people making assumptions about the private life of a middle-aged single woman who may well wonder if by focusing on a career where she has enjoyed considerable success, she compromised her chances to find a husband. I know many single women of her demographic who would very much like not to be. And the more people blather on about her supposed private life, the less likely it is that she’ll find a man.
Did people make these assumptions about Sonia Sotomayor, divorced in 1983 and single ever since?
Look, I think it would be a great thing to have a lesbian on the Supreme Court and I was all prepared to go all out to defend my former law professor Pam Karlan’s qualifications if the president had tapped that distinguished law professor. But, Ms. Karlan self-identifies as a lesbian (though she had a boyfriend when she taught me). That’s her choice. And we should respect it. Ms. Kagan doesn’t talk about her private life. And we should respect that too.
As per that nominee, let’s consider her qualifications, her record as a jurist, her scholarly writings and leave her private life out of it.
UPDATE: Her friends say she’s not gay:
“I’ve known her for most of her adult life and I know she’s straight,” said Sarah Walzer, Kagan’s roommate in law school and a close friend since then. “She dated men when we were in law school, we talked about men — who in our class was cute, who she would like to date, all of those things. She definitely dated when she was in D.C. after law school, when she was in Chicago – and she just didn’t find the right person.”
Read the whole thing. Some bloggers have got a lot of ‘splaining to do.
For once we agree on something. I fail to see how Kagan’s romantic history is relevant to her qualifications for this job. And like you I’m embarrassed for a whole lot of bloggers who ought to know better.
“She definitely dated when she was in D.C. after law school, when she was in Chicago – and she just didn’t find the right person.”
There’s a “Because they all had a penis” joke somewhere in there, but I shall leave that to better (or worse) men.
I understand the confusion… I was confused for a lesbian once 😉
Heh, heh–you said nub.
I agree. Her love life is not relevant. Her ability to interpret the Constitution is (and that is where my doubts lie).
Identity politics have no place on the Supreme Court (nor is there a place for someone who can empathize). If we start thinking of “tribal” seats (gay seats, Hispanic seats, black seats, female seats, and all the rest) then we’re going to need a lot more than nine seats on the court.
Tribalism is the road to ruin.
I do recall that people claimed Sotomayor is a lesbian as well.
Btw, this article with all her friends claiming she isn’t, just makes me think she is.
They do protest too much.
Her sexual orientation shouldn’t be a consideration for this post. But note that once again the left is having a fit about this. I don’t see much concern about her sexuality on the Right, it’s a concern about her leftie ideas that bother us. That said, she’ll be confirmed, this is why elections matter so much.
Once again the right wing rumor mill is at work! This woman is an extremely intelligent and qualified person to sit on the Supreme Court. It always makes me laugh to think that some people still feel that homosexuality is something to fear , and understand that I am not saying that Miss Kagan is or isn’t a lesbian. This fear comes from the huge majority of right-wingers who are from the Bible-belt , who still have the belief that ones character is somehow flawed if they are a homosexual, that he or she is a “Sinner”, Wake up people and realize that sexual orientation is a biological matter, that has nothing to do with a persons intellect or morals and it is time for all you right-wingers to join the 21st century ! Miss Kagan will be confirmed so save your breath .
Did the hypocrisy alarm just go off?
Ain’t no way Houndentenor will be back baying if Kagan comes out as a lesbian and against same sex marriage.
Uh-uh, nope. No way that old Houndentenor would be moved to comment. That is because Houndentenor “fails to see how Kagan’s romantic history is relevant to her qualifications.” Why, if Kagan is gay and dumps on the gay “agenda” old Houndentenor will just say “good on her!”
Good on you, Houndentenor, you may have just tripped up into resembling a man of principle.
Sexual behavior is a manifestation of one’s psychopathology. It matters.
RJLigier, if you’re suggesting that merely being homosexual is a “psychopathology”, then you are perhaps setting the definitional threshold for “psychopathology” so ridiculously low as to render the term useless. You might as well say that liking strawberry Jell-O more than butterscotch pudding, or preferring Patsy Cline to Neil Diamond, is a “psychopathology.”
The fact that the White House (on background only, not on the record) and her no-name friends plus Eliot Spitzer spurred a two-page article on POLITICO saying she’s not a lesbian only makes me think she is more. I also think the WH loves this ambiguity since it keeps people talking about who she sleeps with rather than her qualifications and judicial philosophy.
The Free Dictionary:
Wikipedia:
RJLigier:
What if one has a sexual behavior but does not have a psychopathology? Does that mean one is dead?
Is it possible to be a living, thinking, acting human and have sexual behavior that is not a manifestation of one’s psychopathology? Or must we all be chaste and cloistered?
Certainly the women should be shrouded in black from head to toe and have only tight mesh eyeholes to see and be modestly seen and as formless as a sofa covered and protected while the ceiling is being patched.
I could care less about her sexuality unless she were to use it, her ‘feelings’ or Euoropean law and not the law of this land or the Constitution to make a decision or ruling. I would love to see Tammy Bruce as one of the Supremes.
I just noticed this in the quote from Kagan’s friend Sarah Walzer:
“For example,” continued Walzer, “Elaine dated this one individual, and she really liked them, but this individual eventually told Elaine that they did not want a long-term relationship with her. Later, she got involved with another Carbon-Based Entity, but Elaine dumped them when she found out that the CBE was cheating on her with a different CBE.”
kate, this story wasn’t generated by a right-wing rumor mill, but by a left-wing blogger
The funniest part of this…the liberal bloggers are against her because they think she’s too friendly with conservatives. The right is going to oppose her because she’s been appointed by Obama (and to be fair, this is how it works now…nominees are automatically opposed by the other party). Any nominee who can simultaneously rile both left and right must be doing something right.
Houndentenor, you’re onto something. It’s sad that liberals would be against her for being open minded. I wonder if they would have shown the same contempt for Pam Karlan who, while at U-VA, had lots of fans in the Federalist Society, including its then-president, me.
At the end of the day, it’s the committed lefties who are out there attacking career women with “lesbian” slurs. Isn’t it? They just pretend they’re not.
I think her being (or not) a lesbian is entirely relative to her qualities to serve, etc.
Specifically, IF she were a lesbian, we may expect she’ll reorganize pretty much everthing about the SC; right down to who sits where and who brings what to which function/hearing. We may also expect that when the other SCJ’s don’t either ‘do as she’s asked’ or ‘do not fully appreciate’ her talents in those areas….that she’ll throw a fit, pack her UHaul and be gone… promising everyone in her wake, that they’ll miss her soon enough as their own endeavors will utterly fail w/o her framework of organization and efficiency.
IF she were a lesbian…
I’m fine with her being gay (if she is) and I think it really takes away from the legitimate discussion we should be having about her qualifications for people to beat that drum.
@rodney,
Ok, that was funny. Though I’d expect her to actually drive her tractor to the court, wear flannel robes, have a toaster oven in her chambers and thow darts at pictures of Anne Heche…
…If she were a lesbian. 🙂
Do Justice’s robes come in flannel? 🙂
#17 The problem, Dan, is that a lot of liberals feel that Clinton appointed moderates to the bench (considering that both his appointments were approved by a Republican Senate that was inevitable) and that there are no true left-wingers on the court. I realize Ginsberg might seem like the far left to a lot of far-righters but that’s only in comparison to Alito, Scalia, and company.
The entire confirmation process is a farce. Every nominee since I was old enough to be paying attention to the news (and I’m in my 40s) has played a little charade of not having any opinions about anything. The hearings really serve no purpose any more.
All that said, the liberal bloggers only succeeded in beating the social conservatives to the punch by a few days. This is going to be an issue during the confirmation process.
Being gay, I couldn´t care less about Elaine Kagen´s sexual orientation. I care about her patriotism. As dean of the Harvard Law School she refused to let military recruiters on the Harvard campus. Will she subordinate the Constitution of the United States to the United Nations and will she look to European courts for precedents to justify her vote. From what I have been able to glean about her opinions she makes Sonia Sotomayor look like a centrist. The fact that she ils friends with conservative jurists like Miguel Estrada doesn´t mean they will have any influence on her judicial opinions. I have liberal friends; I am unable to influence them nor can they influence me.
Let´s take a hypothetical situation. Let´s say the occurence at the Texas high school in which students removed the Mexican flag and yet were told not to wear t-shirts with the American flag; either turn them inside out or face suspension. If it should become a legal issue before the SCOTUS, where would Kagen stand? The Court has defended buring the U.S- Flag as protect speech under the First Amendment. Why should a foreign flag receive more respect than the Stars and Stripes? The students merely removed it without desecrating it.