You don’t need to be a “biologist” to define a woman.
The fact that Democrat leaders and their Supreme Court nominee refuse to recognize over half the population shows the Left’s distortion of reality.
Conversation
Replying to
This should help.
1
Replying to
Bet she would have defined a much more relevant question like “define political corruption.”
Hey Jane, that would also be a relevant question for someone running for the Senate.
Follow up - “why do u continue to contribute to the corruption w/in the Ohio GOP?”
#VoteBlueIn2022
4
Replying to
How does Jane define “blood money” and how much of it is she using to self-fund her campaign?
1
1
Replying to
The Honorable Ketanji Brown Jackson is awesome.
She is going to make a great Supreme Court Justice.
1
Replying to
Defining a Woman would be a major essay. Maybe someone will now write a PhD dissertation on it. And the important thing is avoiding stereotypes of what women should be according to their social, economic, cultural and religious predispositions.
Replying to
How does one define “men?” As in “all men are created equal,” “endowed by their creator” “unalienable Rights” . . . you know all that stuff? Definitions change over time. Is everyone in this picture a man? Equal under the eyes of the law?
1
3
