This message was self-deleted by its author

[unblock]

71. i am vastly more interested in process than particular cases.

just as i have zero interest in being a trial court judge but would love being on the supreme court.

you could accused me of "defending" vastly more odious people if you wanted to apply you "logic".

go find someone with an actual track record of misogyny instead of someone with a strong track record as a strong feminist ally like me. if i had to pick sides between women and someone who posts a misogynistic slur, i'd pick women every time. but i think i've earned the right to make a point that's a bit more nuanced than simply picking loyalty sides.

if you want to talk about banning people, or applying punishment in general, you shouldn't be applying rules like automatons. there's no justice in that and it doesn't make du or the world a better place. this is the kind of thinking that led scalia to insist that innocent people be executed even if later evidence proves their innocence because they are entitled only to "due process" and are not entitled to a correct result.

i'm not defending anyone and i'm not lobbying for anyone's return. i'm just trying to steer the debate to a higher ground.

unsuccessfully, it appears.