Which of these statements do you agree with?

[Ebowed]

Statement 1: "Race, sex, etc. should be absolutely irrelevant in choosing Justices."

Statement 2: "I think its [sic] important that we have diversity on the court and that we have conservative* role models for young people of all races to look up to."

*If you're not conservative, replace that with whatever your ideology is.

As for me, I definitely agree with Statement 1.

[Emsworth]

Statement 1

[Platypus]

statement 1-Australia, USA, etc

statement 2-Canada

[Alcon]

Statement 1.

What's a role model if they haven't succeeded because of their merits?

[Gabu]

Statement 1.  Why can a white adult not be a role model to a black child?  I've never understood this.

[Akno21]

Statement 1, and I'm actually glad Bush was brave enough to appoint who he thought was best for the job, even if he was a white, affluent, male and not a hispanic woman with a Edwards-esque life story.

[Speed of Sound]

Statement 1

[MODU]

Statement 1.

What's a role model if they haven't succeeded because of their merits?

Amen.  "Quota's/Political Correctness SUCK!"  Unfortunately, merit isn't good enough for some.  Why sacrifice quality in order to meet some physical attribute which does not provide anything in regards to reading/understanding the Constitution?

[Jake]

One easily.

[Nym90]

Numero uno.

[elcorazon]

Statement 2.  I understand the pull for statement 1, but I believe it's disingenuous.  It assumes that there is only 1 best candidate for the supreme court and that there is some sort of true objective manner of picking them.  The reality is that there are literally dozens, if not more, "qualified" candidates - some are men, some are women, some white, some black, some hispanic, some Jewish, some Christian, etc.  I'm not for keeping slots for women, blacks, etc. but I do think there is an importance in having diversity that does not have to compromise the level of ability on the Court.  Of course, the Court will never perfectly dovetail with the demographics of our society, but there are 8 of 9 men on the Court now, and we are over 50% women - I'd even venture to say that more than 11% of the "qualified" candidates are women - or should be, anyway.  Just my 2 cents.

[Blue Rectangle]

Statement 1: "Race, sex, etc. should be absolutely irrelevant in choosing Justices."

Statement 2: "I think its [sic] important that we have diversity on the court and that we have conservative* role models for young people of all races to look up to."

*If you're not conservative, replace that with whatever your ideology is.

As for me, I definitely agree with Statement 1.

The first statement suggests that race and gender diversity are not important.  I agree.

The second statement seems to be talking about diversity in terms of ideology, rather than race.  I also agree with that statement.

[Emsworth]

The first statement suggests that race and gender diversity are not important.  I agree.

The second statement seems to be talking about diversity in terms of ideology, rather than race.  I also agree with that statement.

The second statement was made in the context of race and sex being considered in making Supreme Court nominations. I do not believe that it was made in the context of ideology.