Approximately 40% of WalMarts workforce is single unwed mothers. These are people who rarely make it into management positions in any company because the time involved in raising a child by yourself conflicts with the time invloved with being a manager.Of course these women made the choice to have a child out of wedlock and must now live with that decision. But since liberals do not believe in choices having consequences, they insist that we make special concessions for people who have screwed themselves over.
Again with this case, it’s overlooked that finding a case doesn’t meet the criteria for “consideration” is NOT equal to a “decision” or finding of fact in a legal case before the appeals bench, or SCOTUS.
Dtroutma over 12 years ago
Interesting how a court that condemned “legislating” from the bench has not only done that repeatedly, but also “wrote” election results.
oneoldhat over 12 years ago
yes writing election results by requiring all votes be treated equally — as ginsburg suggested people vote shoul be weighted as to who they are
fargopete over 12 years ago
What a world.
grayhares01 over 12 years ago
Approximately 40% of WalMarts workforce is single unwed mothers. These are people who rarely make it into management positions in any company because the time involved in raising a child by yourself conflicts with the time invloved with being a manager.Of course these women made the choice to have a child out of wedlock and must now live with that decision. But since liberals do not believe in choices having consequences, they insist that we make special concessions for people who have screwed themselves over.
petergrt over 12 years ago
Any uberintellectual here noticed that the Court’s ruling was UNANIMOUS . . . ?
Dtroutma over 12 years ago
Again with this case, it’s overlooked that finding a case doesn’t meet the criteria for “consideration” is NOT equal to a “decision” or finding of fact in a legal case before the appeals bench, or SCOTUS.
petergrt over 12 years ago
SCOTUS – decided 9-0 not to decide because the case doesn’t meet the criteria for “consideration” . . . . .brilliant!
surferbob over 12 years ago
Wonder how many people the plaintiffs employ?
d_legendary1 over 12 years ago
Lochner court all over again.