For the love of guacamole, why has the Supreme Court hearings for nominee Amy Coney Barrett turned into a circus of social justice warriors??
When Senator Dianne Feinstein asked Barrett whether or not the Constitution protects gay people's right to marry, Barreto responded that she has "never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and would not ever discriminate on the basis of sexual preference."
What was wrong with that response? Nothing if you ask anyone with a normal brain. However, if you're a liberal crybaby, the term "sexual preference" is now offensive.
Later on Tuesday, Senator Mazie Hirono blasted Barrett for her used of the phrase, claiming that is is "outdated" and "offensive."
“Even though you didn’t give a direct answer, I think your response did speak volumes,” Hirono said. “Not once but twice you used the term ‘sexual preference’ to describe those in the LGBTQ community.
“And let me make clear: 'sexual preference' is an offensive and outdated term,” she added. “It is used by anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice.”
Sen. Mazie Hirono to Amy Coney Barrett: "You use the term 'sexual preference' to describe those in the LGBTQ community. And let me make clear: 'sexual preference' is an offensive & outdated term. It is used by anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice." pic.twitter.com/cUJmaKfeot
— The Hill (@thehill) October 14, 2020
Barrett responded to the attack, stating that she “certainly didn’t mean and would never mean to use a term that would cause any offense in the LGBTQ community.”
“So if I did, I greatly apologize for that,” she said. “I simply meant to be referring to Obergefell's holding with regard to same-sex marriage."
So now we are supposed to magically know which terms are suddenly offensive that were never offensive before?? Give me a break.
