Cornelia Pillard nominated to DC Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted by Mastodon on Wed, 2013-07-24 21:07

Article here. Excerpt:

'I was amazed (though I shouldn’t have been) to learn of Pillard’s pet legal theory — that abstinence-only sex education is unconstitutional. Pillard wants federal judges to require “egalitarian sex education.” What does that mean?

"Egalitarian sex education should recognize the realities of sex-based subordination and harm even while it strongly counters sex-based stereotypes and double standards. It should acknowledge and oppose male-on-female aggression and the larger system of gender hierarchy that such aggression exemplifies and sustains. It should also, however, recognize that boys and men, too, are frequently harmed by sexual aggression, and that girls and women can be the moving force behind irresponsible or otherwise harmful sex. And it should always–especially as applied to young people—express hope that old patterns will change."
...
Pillard is also a pro-abortion extremist. The right to an abortion, she argues, is necessary to help to “free[] women from historically routine conscription into maternity.” She also contends that men and women who oppose government mandates on employers to provide insurance coverage for contraception “reinforce[] broader patterns of discrimination against women as a class of presumptive breeders.”'

---
Wikipedia on Cornelia Pillard

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Fine if she wants to view unwanted pregnancies w/out abortion as an option as a form of conscription. I just think it's funny ("funny") how she overlooks entirely the violation of men's human rights when they're actually conscripted for real, and the involuntary conscription likewise of unwanted fatherhood.

As for the whole sex ed thing... I think it speaks for itself.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Thu, 2013-07-25 01:34

I thought judges are supposed to interpret and apply the law and be as unbiased as humanly possible. I suppose she feels she is interpreting and applying the law, but obviously from a very feminist point of view. I can respect that she has a strong opinion, but it is her desire to influence the educational system and increase the role of the schools that has me concerned. As the saying goes...."the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world". This is why people with extreme views want into the schools.

IMO, schools need to stick to academics. Sex ed should be taught in terms of biology. Morality, ethics, and the location of nearby clinics should be left up to parents. I'm sure many will disagree with me, but schools should not replace parents and they need to stay out of the role as "healthcare counselor" or in this case "sex counselor". Discussing sexual behavior in opinionated terms of what's harmful sexual behavior and what's not, is not what teachers should be doing.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Kris on Thu, 2013-07-25 03:13