It’s not just blog sites anymore … the Washington Post today discusses the latest Supreme Court nominee’s sexual preference. And while doing so, Ruth Marcus makes the case to Obama that his next pick should be an actual gay justice — it’s the diverse thing to do:
From my (straight, married mother) point of view, a gay justice would be a benefit to the court and the country. To the country because it would speed up the inevitable: acceptance of gay Americans in all walks of life. To the court because — as with any additional perspective — an openly gay justice would add to the richness of the court’s understanding of cases, particularly gay rights cases, that come before it.
Would we need bisexual, transgender, and “questioning” justices (going through the GLBTQ list) before our nation’s college campuses were adequately represented?
It’s remarkable to me that this woman’s personal life is being so openly discussed — without her or the president making it an issue. There are plenty of substantive judicial issues to discuss. But then Senate judicial fights in recent years, have been known to slander nominees and make a spouse cry — they’ve even attacked family vacation choices.