Democrats Smear ACB At Supreme Court Hearings Because Why Not?
[guest post by Dana]
How utterly predictable that Democrats willfully ignore Joe Biden’s “offensive” use of the term “sexual preference,” yet take great offense at Amy Coney Barrett using the same term. Was there really any difference in how Biden and ACB deployed the term or were they both using it as synonymous with sexual orientation? I think they were. [Ed. See what I did there? I gave both Biden and ACB the benefit of the doubt because that’s what reasonable people – not weaselly politicians using the hearings as their own personal campaign prop – do.]
I looked to see if Democrats have condemned Joe Biden for this, and so far I’ve come up empty:
Anyway, these double-standard smears only serve to remind us that these hearings are little more than soapbox derbies of a different kind…(the operative word being soapbox). If those who have publicly taken offense at ACB’s use of “sexual preference” haven’t also publicly taken offense at Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s use of the same phrase, then all they have done is to remind us that they should not be taken seriously. Whether elected officials, advocacy groups, or journalists:
I know the phrase “sexual preference” was common in the old days, but LGBTQ people almost never use it today, for good reason: It suggests sexuality is a “preference” that can be changed. Today it’s more often used by anti-gay activists.
I am alarmed that Barrett said it.
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) October 13, 2020
It's not a "preference," Judge Barrett. #BlockBarrett #SCOTUSHearing #OurCourt pic.twitter.com/V2drHlRK9z
— National Women's Law Center (@nwlc) October 13, 2020
I am not surprised that ACB used the language of “sexual preference”. She is a right-wing ideologue and we know where she stands. The question we should be asking is how we can stop a system that is allowing her to be placed in this kind of position of power for life.
— Chase Strangio (@chasestrangio) October 13, 2020
Let me make clear – sexual preference is an offensive and outdated term.
To suggest sexual orientation is a choice? It's not. It's a key part of a person's identity.
The LGBTQ+ community should be concerned with #WhatsAtStake with Judge Barrett on the Supreme Court. pic.twitter.com/4TWyATMX0Y
— Senator Mazie Hirono (@maziehirono) October 13, 2020
Here is a great look at the fraud of this Democratic huff-puffery :
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who Mazie Hirono called "our champion" on Monday, used the term "sexual preference" in 2017. Hirono jumped on Amy Coney Barrett for saying it Tuesday, calling it "offensive and outdated." pic.twitter.com/8bHIQTSVFk https://t.co/JlcRA35g59
— David Rutz (@DavidRutz) October 14, 2020
ACB ended up choosing to apologize for her use of the term “sexual preference,” but we’re still waiting on Joe Biden:
And maybe that’s partly why the American public seems to be developing a liking for her:
Morning Consult poll: Support to confirm Amy Coney Barrett continues to rise, going from +3 at the end of September to +17 today.
Support from idependents has moved from -3 to +7 over the last two weeks.
There is zero chance that ACB is not confirmed given these numbers. pic.twitter.com/E0PcQt50aE
— Josh Jordan (@NumbersMuncher) October 14, 2020
P.S. Who is Mazie Hirono, the self-proclaimed language police, to tell anyone what is and isn’t offensive, especially those who identify as LGBT?
Anyway, this faux-outrage is about as stupid as Lindsey Graham trying to make a joke about segregation. Just stop. People really should take more time to think, and then carefully consider whether opening their big yap is in anyone’s best interest but their own.