Law is women’s work, and so is lot more

Well knock me over with a feather. Glenn makes the argument women good at some stuff and men are good at some stuff. The most remarkable people in my life were, are women. Starting with my Grandmother on moms side and on down to mom my wife and now my daughters and granddaughters, amazing ladies all. I guess if I can disagree with anything he posited it is his accepting the ridicules notion men can marry other men. If language and a system of civic life with a 5000 year old Judeo/Christian foundation means anything it should have standing and reverence. Olsen and Kennedy started a mudslide into the sewer with their obscene version of American life.

No. 1: There are good arguments against gay marriage (though I think they don't really persuade me anymore, especially now that we've witnessed no end-of-the world with a decade of it). But an argument against gay marriage that is NOT a particularly good one is that the prohibition on it is old. Also old are canibalism, slavery, pederasty and polygamy, and prohibitions on women in the workplace, the mere existence of gays, capital punishment by torture, and overt racial discrimination. You gotta do better than "it's old."

#2...If you think old is the definition of cultural rot , slavery cannibalism etc, and a redefining of the ideals that are the glue of a civilization I guess we can just throw out all the things got us here. I mean why not discard our mores ethics and religious beliefs. The mudslide into the sewer we are now in can be traced to the legal slaughter of babies and the homosexual onslaught of values and human decency. From bath houses to aids to homosexual marriage to a freak show in our Whitehouse with a pervert prancing around in a skirt and an Admirals uniform on. If your world is the new I'll stick with the old, sans the cannibalism and slavery religious men and women stopped.

No. 3: You miscontrue my point, accidentally I assume. I'm not arguing that that everything old is bad and everything new is good, as you seem to suggest I am. Rather, I'm arguing that just because something is old doesn't make it good. Conversely, just because something is new doesn't make it good either. "Old" or "new" do not dictate "good" or "bad." I hope you appreciate the distinction.

I would submit as exhibit 1 judge Beryl Howell as proof women aren't better at being a judge. And exhibit 2 as judge WhatsHisName Sullivan as proof that men aren't better at being a judge. Of wait, what's their common factor? Of that's right, they're corrupt commies. So I would submit to Glenn that no corrupt commie, man or woman, is good at law.

There are good and bad women lawyers (some real airheads in fact), as well as good and bad men lawyers. I've worked with both for over 40 years. A woman was my best mentor, as was my most ditzy law professor and biggest pain in the ass subordinate millenial. Sandra Day O'Connor was a mediocrity. Beaton is full of it, and we're seeing more and more of that from him anymore, sad to say.

Ah Glenn, law school, law practice, and opinionating seem to have left you with little knowledge of other fields. You wrote "…to get you into med school – you have to survive undergraduate calculus and organic chemistry and quantum physics. But physicians don’t actually use any of those fields, just as engineers don’t use differential equations but are required to take a course in the subject." 1. The calculus taken by pre-meds is usually a watered-down, high school level course that just gives a general idea of the subject. 2. A physician needs at least a little organic chem, if not the full-bore course a chemistry or chemical engineering major needs. 3. I never heard of quantum physics being required for med school. Perhaps a popular science account, such as an English major might enjoy would be appropriate. A basic general physics course could be useful. I once heard a radiologist order, "We need to double the dose, so cut the distance to the x-ray tube in half." I had to tell him that would result in four times the dose! He needed to cut the distance by the square-root of two (about 1.4). As to engineers not needing to know differential equations, that's simply laughable. (I have degrees in engineering, physics, and mathematics and over forty years of experience in those fields, both in industry and government.) As for law, I thinkyou are probably right.

O'Connor: AA token hire. Mediocre at best. Ginsburg: Highly overrated, ACLU partisan hack, lionized as a reliable liberal vote regardless of the facts/merits. Kagan: Not dumb, but unqualified. Solicitor General for ten minutes completed her resume. Sotomayor: Moron. Jackson: Bigger Moron. Just saying.