Faulty reasoning signals

• Confirmation Bias - 8.9% (68 hits)
• Anchoring Bias - 0%
• Availability Heuristic - 7.5% (57 hits)
• Representativeness Heuristic - 0%
• Hindsight Bias - 0%
• Overconfidence Bias - 4.7% (36 hits)
• Framing Effect - 39.9% (303 hits)
• Loss Aversion - 0%
• Status Quo Bias - 0%
• Sunk Cost Effect - 0%
• Optimism Bias - 0%
• Pessimism Bias - 0%

Article text

Ketanji Brown Jackson Is Neither A Biologist Nor A Qualified Justice

Being a justice on the United States Supreme Court requires legal brilliance, intellectual rigor, strict discernment of and adherence to facts, and logical consistency.

Clearly, not every justice on the current court meets these criteria.

This was demonstrated in the courts’ recent “trans” sports decision that now reasonably permits schools, under Title IX, to let biological sex be the determinant of who can and cannot compete on high school and college sports teams.

In sum, this was a case about fundamental human reality and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s bold and incoherent dissent from it.

In their landmark 6-3 decision, the majority (Kavanaugh, Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Barrett) describe the primary plaintiff — identified as “B.P.J.” in the case — as a biological male who “identifies as female.”

This boy is West Virginia’s Becky Pepper-Jackson, who consistently dominated girls in track and field events.

Kristen Waggoner, President of Alliance Defending Freedom, an organization that helped argue this case before the court, said Pepper-Jackson took wins from more than 470 girls over 1,400 competitions.

He stole two regional and one state championship from deserving female athletes.

In addition to beating girls in sports, Pepper-Jackson also threatened them with sexual assault in the locker room, Waggoner explained to a CNN host.

The majority thankfully never referred to this sexually abusive boy as “transgender” nor by female pronouns, but simply as B.P.J.

They chose to not play the gender ideology language game.

That was certainly not true for the minority justices Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson.

They confess “B.P.J. is also transgender” while ignoring the fact that no one is transgender.

It is a made-up term with no objective scientific backing.

Even the American Psychiatric Association (APA), who regularly carries water for trans ideology, confesses “transgender is a non-medical term” which merely refers to one’s subjective gender-atypical belief or physical presentation.

The APA explains the term is used interchangeably with other meaningless ideological words such as “gender non-conforming, genderqueer, bigendered and agendered.”

Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson then write these nonsensical words: “Her sex was identified at birth, but she has known from the time that she was ‘very little’ that she is a girl.”

This is the deceptive talk of gender ideology.

These three justices reflexively side with and parrot the child’s obvious mental illness, all while sitting on America’s highest court.

This is bad enough already, but certainly not the worst of it.

That award is reserved for the court’s newest member, Ketanji Brown Jackson, who famously confessed to the world that she could not explain what a woman is because “I am not a biologist.”

Yet, in her own solitary dissent, Justice Jackson obliterates biology with double-barrel fervor.

She employs the nonsensical terms “sex assigned at birth” or “assigned male at birth” 13 times in her brief six paragraph dissent.

No other justices employed this term.

No one is “assigned” their sex at birth, and no reasonable person should ever use that ideological term.

Certainly not a supreme court justice.

Anyone doing so is virtue signaling their blind allegiance to a contra-scientific ideology that sex is determined by one’s subjective self-perception.

Science is unambiguous: Our sex — either male or female, and only male or female — is written into every cell of our body from conception.

As Justice Thomas plainly stated in his concurrence, “Men and boys with gender dysphoria are not women or girls, even if they believe that they are.”

He added, “To use language to obscure reality — to show “indifference regarding the truth” — is to lie to the public and cease to treat our fellow citizens “as equal[s].”

Justice Jackson lied to the public in her ruling, something no member of any court can ever do.

At the close of her dissent, she creatively asserts, “Title IX makes room for individuals to live in the gender they choose; it cares not just about sex assigned at birth but also about individuals’ ability to match (or not) their gender presentation to their gender identity.”

Breath that nonsense in to fully appreciate the inanity of it.

Jackson then concludes with this bit of metaphysical wonderment: “Because West Virginia’s law forces B.P.J. to live — in this case, to play — as a boy though she is a girl, it might well run afoul of Title IX properly construed.”

Justice Jackson was right: she certainly is not a biologist.

Tortured reasoning like this demonstrates why she certainly does not have the chops to be a supreme court justice.