Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Coin toss

Sadie, sorry I missed your question on The Great White Bear's reply to your statement. A little background, Great White Bear and Sadie were having a friendly discussion about Harriet Miers a few weeks back. The discussion itself stayed friendly, which is a wonderful thing. Hats off to both Sadie and Great White Bear who showed that two people can disagree and be civil. I won't mention names, but the only person I've ever deleted from this blog needs to take notes.

That said, Sadie asked me this question:
if you had two individuals that were equally qualified and one was a man and one was a woman, who would you pick?


I don't care how the court is stacked when it comes to race, religion, gender, or whatever. I just don't want to see someone chosen for their race, gender, religion, what they name their dog, their astrological sign, birthmarks in strange places, or what have you. When it comes to religion, I'm very private about ours. If someone wants to be evangelical, more power to them. I'm just not.

As for race, I'm private about our races as well. I've always just called myself American.

You all know my gender though. It's kind of hard to write without everyone figuring that out. ;)

But going back to what Sadie asked, I don't care if the Supreme Court had eight men and one woman or eight women and one man. If one of them died and I was President, it shouldn't be an issue. The only issue should be whomever could defend the Constitution best.

Maybe it's because I see the Constitution as sacred. I cannot compromise any part of it. I won't compromise the 1st or the 2nd. I won't compromise the 4th. Picking someone on some artificial basis just to fill stats may not get us the best candidate for the job, which is definitely what I want when we have dirty politicians with less than noble ideas about what our Constitution means.

And I'm glad Miers withdrew because it became apparent she didn't know what she was doing. It had nothing to do with her being a woman and everything to do with cronyism.

It's just like if I were in charge of the Green Bay Packer's draft. I wouldn't want a player of Narnian decent, just because they're way under represented in the NFL. I wouldn't be picking my buddies either.

So if I were President, and hypothetically I had two candidates to choose from, one man, and one woman, both equally awesome in every way - coin toss.

18 Comments:

Blogger clothosfate said...

hahaha.. I love it.

"So if I were President, and hypothetically I had two candidates to choose from, one man, and one woman, both equally awesome in every way - coin toss. "

I think unhealthy hypocrisy is about being hypocritical and denying that it has any influence on your choices. We are all hypocrites in one way or another. The gem is admitting it, at least to yourself, and attempting to reconcile it and not lay it on other people. Bravo to those who can argue their own valuable point of view and graciously leave room for other people to have theirs.

11/01/2005 10:57 PM  
Blogger tenxinchoden said...

"So if I were President, and hypothetically I had two candidates to choose from, one man, and one woman, both equally awesome in every way - coin toss.
"

I guess i'll do the same thin'
GOOD IDEA Zombie...:)

11/01/2005 11:49 PM  
Blogger Laura said...

Thankfully you're not Trent Lott... Did you see his comment last week? The President should find "the best man, woman or minority"... something is wrong with that man, and I bet he doesn't even realize what he said....

I agree, if the qualifications for the job are the same - who cares.

11/02/2005 4:27 AM  
Blogger Bo Salisbury said...

Best qualified... that's it.

So, move over Justice Roberts, The Zombieslayer for Chief Justice.

11/02/2005 6:16 AM  
Blogger The Zombieslayer said...

Bo - I'd end up throwing out half the laws on the books today as Unconstitutional if I were one. ;)

Laura - The President should find "the best man, woman or minority"...

Yikes. I had no idea that there were three genders. I guess I learn something every day. :p

TC - Cool. I just don't like to see positions filled out of political correctness instead of qualifications.

Clothosfate - We are all hypocrites in one way or another. The gem is admitting it, at least to yourself, and attempting to reconcile it and not lay it on other people.

My hypocracy really comes out in parenting. :(
I often catch myself, but not always.

11/02/2005 7:38 AM  
Blogger The Zombie Lama said...

Wait... You're not a lesbian????
;o)

11/02/2005 9:58 AM  
Blogger Shawn said...

The really important thing is...what coin would you use for your toss? Do you make sure that use a Sacajaweiaaaaahahhahhh dollar, or a Sussn B. Anthony, an equal amount as all that man money?

And, the Packers could use some players right around now...even if they were Narnian. Just as long as they can catch a ball or run with one, we'll take 'em.

11/02/2005 10:05 AM  
Blogger Sadie Lou said...

That was an awesome answer Zombie. I'm glad you found the question on GWB's site. I kinda thought you just didn't go back to check on the debate.
For myself, I think the coin toss is a great way to settle a matter such as this. I think I would consider a couple of things before I chose to do the toss.
Take jury selection, for instance. I tend to think that having diversity brings balance to the table.
If Big Government is predominately male--I think adding some female influence is a good idea; to bring balance and diversity to the table. It never hurts to have a bunch of differnt perspectives. So in the case of choosing between two equally qualified individulas, man and woman, I'd see if we were lacking a little diversity. I don't see anything wrong with that.

11/02/2005 10:19 AM  
Blogger Chris said...

True man, good point. Croneys suck.

11/02/2005 10:29 AM  
Blogger bsoholic said...

Yup, I'd have to coin toss too. Hell, I make most all of my daily decisions that way! :P

11/02/2005 2:13 PM  
Blogger Moni said...

Unfortunate, that its done that way. This type of (equality management), making sure all minorities are represented occurs on some level in every political agenda. It's detrimental. Instead of representing that particular minority, it's actually doing them a dis-service to put someone in office that isn't qualified.

~~"Maybe it's because I see the consitution as sacred." "I cannot compromise any part of it"~~

Amen!I don't know how long it's been since I've heard someone make that sort of comment. Reading it was like a breath of fresh air. Too many people in these times want to dismiss the Consitution as outdated. The reason this nation has grown to be a great nation is because of the strict adherance and forethought of our founding fathers.

That was absolutely wise. I may have to quote it...may I? :)

11/02/2005 4:27 PM  
Blogger The Zombieslayer said...

ZL - Wait... You're not a lesbian????

In high school, I used to say "I'm a lesbian trapped in a man's body" but that became cliche. I'd like to believe I said it first. ;)

Shawn - Do you make sure that use a Sacajaweiaaaaahahhahhh dollar, or a Sussn B. Anthony, an equal amount as all that man money?

The Susan B Anthony dollar is the most useless, worst designed piece of !@#$%^& currency that America ever did. Many times I've spent them as quarters and each time, nobody stopped me, not because they're dishonest, because they didn't realize I was handing them a dollar either.

As for the Pack, the team keeps losing by practically nothing. They're 1-6 and have more points for than points against. I think their main problem is they just can't win games. Statistically, they outplay their opponents every game as well.

Sadie - So in the case of choosing between two equally qualified individulas, man and woman, I'd see if we were lacking a little diversity. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I can see where you're coming from, but there are such rare times when you have equally qualified. Someone will almost always be better than the other when it comes to qualifications for a job. But even in the extreme rare case that it is a toss up, I just can't bring myself to favor one person over another because of something they can't help, like their race or their gender. I'd much rather blame a coin. ;)

Chris - Good to see you back. I was hoping you didn't disappear.

By the way, my Congressman Wally Herger (R-CA) wrote me a beautiful letter about Kelo v New London. He even mentioned the possibility of impeachment. :)

Bsoholic - You weren't Bruce Wayne's best friend a decade back, were you?

Moni - Instead of representing that particular minority, it's actually doing them a dis-service to put someone in office that isn't qualified.

Very true. Some people think so and so got the job because he or she was [fill in the blank] instead of qualified. That's what that attitude led to.

Sure, I'd be honored to be quoted by you. Go ahead. :)

11/02/2005 6:28 PM  
Blogger Slade said...

I was thinking "pick one from a hat" as I was reading this, but then of course the feminist spoke inside my head and said "the woman!"

Now if it were a black man and a white woman, the feminist-me might have a little more difficulty

11/03/2005 6:51 AM  
Blogger The Zombieslayer said...

Slade - Like I told Sadie, I'd really feel bad saying no to someone over something they can't help. Just imagine someone who has worked hard their whole life and finally when the position comes up, you have to say no to them not on their qualifications but on their race or gender. Sexism and racism are sexism and racism, no matter which group they hit.

So as I said, I'd much rather blame the coin (or a hat). ;)

11/03/2005 7:51 AM  
Blogger Scott said...

If things were exactly equal, which is never the case, but if they were, I would choose then based on which gender was under-represented. Only if things were exactly equal though.

11/03/2005 8:10 AM  
Blogger Sadie Lou said...

Slade - Like I told Sadie, I'd really feel bad saying no to someone over something they can't help. Just imagine someone who has worked hard their whole life and finally when the position comes up, you have to say no to them not on their qualifications but on their race or gender. Sexism and racism are sexism and racism, no matter which group they hit.

I wonder if the person you didn't pick would understand the value of what you were trying to accomplish.

11/03/2005 11:15 AM  
Blogger Levi Nunnink said...

I always liked Uncle Eric's Two Laws

(1) Do all you have agreed to do. This is the basis of contract law. (2) Do not encroach on other persons or their property. This is the basis of tort law and some criminal law.

I wish we could just keep it basic like that. Rightly interpret the constitution and protect America's freedom. If you were appointed, Zombie, I hope you would throw out half the laws and maybe a few more.

And aren't civil debates great. I love hearing two intelligent people respectfully and graciously disagree. It's even better (and more rare) hearing an intelligent person graciously admit that they were wrong.

11/03/2005 11:49 AM  
Blogger The Zombieslayer said...

Levi - I love that. Nice and simple.

And yes, I love civility and always good to see someone graciously admit they're wrong.

Sadie - Yeah, me too.

Scott - I see what you're getting at, which is I guess similar to what Sadie and Slade were getting at. It would be fine as long as if the tables were turned, that we'd balance it the other way under perfect conditions where both candidates are exactly equal. I still wouldn't want to be the one to tell the person that he or she didn't get the job because we had to be fair to someone who is less represented.

11/03/2005 5:47 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home