And I don't mean that in the usual sense.

Which stands in heterogene opposition to both. But I fear that Thomas has a rather binary mind.

to enslave people or put them in camps or deny them basic subsistence, because, hey, they don't lose their dignity? Damn, that's downright offensive - but what else would we expect from that guy? He's got all the dignity he needs as a member of the U.S. Supreme Court - a respected position, a comfortable income - but I wonder how "dignified" some of his ancestors felt as someone else's personal possession who was forced to work in the cotton fields and who could be sold, beaten, deprived of comfort, separated from his family, even killed, at the whim of his owner. How "dignified" do people feel when they have lost their jobs and their homes and are living in abject poverty under a bridge? Damn, that's one of the most nastily clueless things I've ever read.

But this puts him in sociopath category.

NBA features mostly black players.

SERIOUSLY.

Is he certifiably mad or just stupid?

As to the substance of the paragraph, the issue is not whether the dignity is taken away, it is whether it has legal standing.

-- Mal

2. bearing, conduct, or speech indicative of self-respect or appreciation of the formality or gravity of an occasion or situation.

3. elevated rank, office, station, etc.

4. relative standing; rank.

5. a sign or token of respect:

I'm going out on a limb and saying forced imprisonment and treatment to inhuman conditions pretty much doesn't fit the actual definition of dignity. When they impeach you from the bench and lock you up for crimes against humanity... they've pretty much taken away your dignity. You might still have your pride and your own sense of self worth, but most humans with empathy understand they've destroyed your dignity.

I don't know what does. Let's see how much dignity he can muster if he were stripped naked and paraded around, with the consequences of trying to hide his nakedness being beatings. Sorry, but I say that those are the sorts of conditions that do cause people to lose their dignity.

The reason Thomas was put on the SCOTUS was...

...NOT because he was the most qualified jurist. He wasn't.
...NOT because he was the most qualified black jurist. He wasn't.
...NOT because he was the most qualified black conservative jurist. He wasn't.

He was the most qualified black conservative with reliable but obfuscatable views on abortion & other subjects, and was young enough that he'd stay on the court for decades.

The Democratic senators were initially ready to give him a pass, since 1) they didn't look forward to another SC nomination battle, and 2) initially the black community was receptive to Thomas -- not enthusiastic, but not inclined to oppose -- and a fight against him wouldn't be well received.

At the time I thought Thomas should have been voted down just because of his lackluster record and ignoring conflict of interest (Thomas failed to recuse himself in a case involving the Ralston Purina company, where his political mentor Sen. John Danforth owned millions in stock and had brothers on the board of directors. Thomas' decision in favor of Purina directly benefited his pals).

Black opinion didn't shift until later in the process, after Thurgood Marshall made his "a black snake is still a snake" comment. The senators were finally forced to take a harder line when the harassment charges leaked out, and giving Thomas a pass would piss off another Democratic constituency: women fighting workplace harassment.

But all that happened too late: by that point conservatives were ginned up in support and the rest of the establishment didn't want another highly-visible fight, so the Thomas hearings were kept to a he-said-she-said with Anita Hill (Angela Wright was shunted off to the side), giving the senators their excuse to just put it behind them.

So here we are, a quarter-century later, and he's still a lackluster jurist who ignores conflicts of interest, and is a reliable conservative operative in the courts.

Anyone Senator who voted for this jack asses confirmation, and the idiot who nominated him, ought to be ashamed.

The guy is one stupid fucker and the rest of them were just as stupid to vote for his stupid ass!

I watched the hearings..

The vote was a way to make up for the Robert Bork rebuke...

They voted down one scary dude and look what we got in his place..

I'm not sure which is scarier.

I just looked up Bork... I didn't realize he departed this continuum in 2012....

Woops, it was GHWB that nominated him in 1991... I thought his confirmation was part of the Bork pay back... maybe my memory is slipping some!

she knew... millions of Americans knew he was a sick rat bastard...

We need an analogue of Godwin's Law for whackjobs like this who compare (insert issue here) to slavery. Long Dong's Law?

The Huckster is guilty as well.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026887972

They try to rob America and the Court of its dignity.

.... but, his abject stupidity and bigotry will not dampen the joy I feel for others!

He'd rule against the Loving decision as well.

Freedom of adults to have self determination as long as they cause no harm. Two men or women being married causes no harm. And has no impact on your life or your rights. Therefore you are seeking to strip the rights of others just because you disagree with them even though they are causing no harm. Why dear sir do you hate freedom so much?

with him on the dignity part, you own your dignity. I wonder if he knows he's channelling Kahlil Gibran? But what does this have to do with the issue at hand?

I always get the impression that Thomas' opinions were written on paper with the lines really far apart...in crayon.

Not surprised though.

"Justice" Thomas sit on the bench.