Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Is the ABA liberal-biased:Abortion/Hill
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 14 Aug 92 09:45:12 EST
Followup-To: ca.politics
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <2296@tymix.Tymnet.COM>, jdoskow@ichinen.Tymnet.COM (Jonathan Doskow) writes:
> In article <63892@cup.portal.com> Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com writes:
>>The ABA gives Anita Hill an award for telling a story that most Americans
>>don't believe, and for taking a stand that most Americans think she is lying
>>about. 
> 
> Perhaps the fact that lawyers are in some cases trained and experienced
> in examining evidence and evaluating conflicting testimony has something
> to do with it.

	!
	Well, that's one way of referring to ambulance chasers :).

> A while back I posted the result of a study on the American jury system
> that indicated that, in rape cases, presiding judges were inclined to
> convict 5 times more than juries.
> 
> I'm not saying that that indicates that juries are wrong.  But what does
> the belief of the majority of people have to do with the truth of the
> matter?  

	That's the way the system works.

> Perhaps also, more ABA members have read or read summaries of "Capital
> Games" which examines the confirmation hearings.  The authors quote
> named sources (who, by their training should certainly understand the
> meaning and consequences of slander) who state that Thomas frequented
> hard-core porno theaters while a law student at Yale, that he rented
> them from vidoe stores in Washington, and that, far from being shy about
> talking about them, loved to "regale his friends with details of some
> porn films he had seen, specifically ... joking about the then-popular
> pornographic fantasy "Behind the Green Door."

	The assumption being, of course, that there is something wrong with
viewing X-rated materials.  Now, which court has to view them to decide
constitutionality issues?  Hmmm, the Supreme Court, isn't it?
	Maybe he was just practicing :).

> I'm not sure whether or not such a pattern of behavior could be
> admissible as evidence in a criminal trial, but then, Thomas was not on
> trial for a crime.

	"pattern of behaviour"

	Kind of like calling free speech a "pattern of behaviour".

>>        Hillary Clinton gives a big speech. They take a position on abortion
>>than can be nothing but political, and is so extremem that they believe that
>>NO restrictions on abortion should be allowed.
>>
> Hey, sometimes lawyers think about the consequences of enforcing laws.

	Like the WOD?
> 
>>How can the ABA call themselves non-partisan? How are the rest of us supposed
>>to feel when we know any lawyer we hire is sworn to uphold the principles of
>>political correctness?
> 
> If you do need a lawyer and feel you will get better representation by
> applying a litmus test on an irrelevant issue, ask.

	I think about only time a lawyer is really needed is to protect one
from other lawyers.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!