[fwdude]

She’s a woman. Women are roughly 3x more likely to be risk averse than men.

This is why women shouldn’t be on any court bench.

[guido911]

Dumbass, misogynist post.

Look, you either trust Trump or you don’t. The one “life” case that came before his appointees they stepped up.

[MagnoliaB]

“She’s a woman. Women are roughly 3x more likely to be risk averse than men.

This is why women shouldn’t be on any court bench.”

Dang, you made me laugh and spit coffee on my keyboard.

So how do you explain Justice Roberts and his mandatory Obamacare TAX? And other ANTI-conservative decisions he’s made that obviously indicate the man has been compromised with something.

Funny a John Roberts was on an Epstein flight and other suspicious activity and allegations swirl around him. You know men are 8X to 9X times more likely to be a pedophile than women and diddle small children and/or have child porn on their computer being 8-9X more likely to be a risk of being compromised than women.

This is why men shouldn’t be on any court bench.

[Vigilanteman]

While what you said may be logically true, it is politically impossible. That is why the logical alternative is NOT to exclude women (or effeminate men, for that matter) but select those which are most likely to rule based on the law and preferences rather than their emotions.

In this category, Mrs. Barrett will beat RBG all of the time every time. Even if she isn't a carbon copy of Justice Thomas or Justice Scalia, both unique national treasures.

[caww]

I’m more concerned with her large family and special needs children. Also she’s going to have issues about her beliefs in speaking in tongues etc. when it comes to what they’ll be putting her through in the process.

I’ve been seated next to individuals who will break out in jibber-jabber as if they have no control over their mouths. I sure wouldn’t want that happening if I was in meetings as Scotus.

[backwoods-engineer]

I really cannot disagree. Women are supposed to be nurturers, not lawmakers, and not judges. Very few women are clear-thinking enough to be judges. Risk-aversion in a judge is a bad thing in a free society.

[Bob434]

[[Women are roughly 3x more likely to be risk averse than men.]]

the aborted 10’s millions would dispute that claim

Women are weird- they sympathize with criminals, Even rapists, Want to defund police and/or make it impossible for them to defend themselves- they fight to be able to murder babies- but then turn around and demand all kinds of laws to protect the children they allow to live

Objective morals aren’t in their vocabulary- only subjective ones-

NOT all women are like this- but a great many liberals ones are- even some ‘conservative’ women-