Amy Coney Barrett for Supreme Court Justice

[PennyinCanada]

The Christ’s priorities have always been for the common man, the poor, the disadvantaged, especially those in desperate need like refugees. In fact I think many of the corporate friendly judges will resign after he comes. The next President will then have many positions to fill

When Christ comes he will judge the living the dead. There is no continuing on, like judges resigning so others can take their place. It’s the separation of the sheep and the goats, the wheat and the weeds. Wheat to the barn, the weeds cast in the fire.

 

[Theo520]

I kind of feel that the Dems will let this go. There isn’t really much they can do and they know it. The current chest puffing is just standard politics.
Something like Kavanaugh they won’t dare to pull off because of the election. But yes in a regular year they would not for a second think about whether they should not try every dirty trick in the book even if it came at the price of destroying a successful mother of seven.

I agree, they will pull out all stops to try cancel the vote, but they won’t go overboard to denigrate the nominee. This is a politically respectable approach, as when the GOP stonewalled Merrick Garland without denigration.

 

[27lw]

…

1. The long term consequences of this. We already have two justices considered to be sexual predators on the Court. Now they’re going to add another that will be rammed down the throats…

1. I don’t understand - are you saying that Barrett is a sexual predator? “Another that will be rammed down the throats”
2. I think you yourself are lying about the “two predators”.
   So who’s lying now?

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Unless you have a great deal of evidence that she is a sexual predator, this is calumny.

That’s not what I meant. I simply meant that in addition to two questionable justices, there will now be a third that has questionable legitimacy since her confirmation will be rammed down the throats of the Democrats.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Almost everyone is ecstatic about Amy because she is Catholic and they think she will overturn Roe v Wade because of her beliefs. In the next breath, they claim that any questioning of her on religious grounds should be out of bounds. Contradiction? Why yes it is!

Being pro-life has nothing to do with religion.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Breaking promises is not lying.

If you say so.

 

[27lw]

Erikaspirit16:

Almost everyone is ecstatic about Amy because she is Catholic and they think she will overturn Roe v Wade because of her beliefs. In the next breath, they claim that any questioning of her on religious grounds should be out of bounds. Contradiction? Why yes it is!

Being pro-life has nothing to do with religion.

As evidenced by Biden, Pelosi, et cetera, et cetera…

 

[Theo520]

Almost everyone is ecstatic about Amy because she is Catholic and they think she will overturn Roe v Wade because of her beliefs.

Actually there are very solid legal arguments for SCOTUS to overturn RvW and return it to being a State legislative decision. No Catholic faith required.

Leaving Roe v Wade and abortion aside, do her supporters know anything about her decisions or legal positions?

Fair point. I’m sure we will explore her positions if she becomes the nominee. However, I doubt there will be any extreme controversy since she was well vetted by experts to get on the short list.

1. The long term consequences of this. We already have two justices considered to be sexual predators on the Court. . .

You made an emotional appeal without substance, read your full paragraph again. You can do better than simply threatening retaliation by Democrats. That’s just trying to bully people.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

And finally, is there anyone who doesn’t realize this is simply one more ploy by Trump to gain votes? Is there anyone who thinks Trump is sincere about his current (!) position on abortion?

The Democrats don’t offer any good alternatives.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

I think you yourself are lying about the “two predators”.
So who’s lying now?

Not me. Read what I wrote: “two justices CONSIDERED to be sexual predators.” Maybe you don’t think they are, but I and millions more do. Where they actually are or not is an open question because Biden refused to allow more witnesses to back up Anita Hill’s story, and the Republicans refused to have witnesses to back up Christine Ford. Both parties were wrong. And if I were confirmed under those circumstances, I would feel my appointment was tainted.

Being pro-life has nothing to do with religion.

Sometimes I agree with you, but not this time. Surely it is linked to religion. It’s a theological / philosophical belief.

You made an emotional appeal without substance, read your full paragraph again. You can do better than simply threatening retaliation by Democrats. That’s just trying to bully people.

We disagree. Schumer has already said “Nothing is off the table.” The Republicans see an opportunity to seize a long-term advantage in the Supreme Court, but they are ignoring the potential consequences. Of course they can do whatever they want, they have this “massive” 3 seat majority. But things change, and the long-term damage they will do to their own party in the Senate and the damage they will do to any hopes of collegiality should at least be considered before ignoring them.

The Democrats don’t offer any good alternatives.

I’m with you there. I have a long, long list of reasons I don’t like Biden. But if I had a choice of voting for Trump or for a toad, the toad would be an easy choice!

If religion is linked to being pro-life, explain Biden. Explain Pelosi. Many many others.

And religion is linked to being pro-choice, too. That’s my point–abortion is a religious issue. Again, a large part of my problems with conservatives is lack of consistency. On the one hand they would be the champions of privacy and limited government. On the other hand, they want the government to insert itself into what should be a private moral decision. Contradiction.

And there’s no reason to think Amy hasn’t led an exemplary life or isn’t “qualified” (as probably hundreds of judges are). And the strange little religious sub-group she belongs to seems harmless enough, although it seems a bit bizarre to me personally. If I were on the committee I would leave all that alone and focus on her legal philosophy and opinions she has written or voted for. There is plenty there to make senators vote against her.

A final thing to think about: a real statesman could have either deferred until after the election or nominated someone who was highly qualified but uncontroversial and acceptable to both parties.

 

[27lw]

VanitasVanitatum:

Being pro-life has nothing to do with religion.

Sometimes I agree with you, but not this time. Surely it is linked to religion. It’s a theological / philosophical belief.

Oh, so you’re defense is that you weren’t lying, just gossipping? Okay.

If religion is linked to being pro-life, explain Biden. Explain Pelosi. Many many others.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Sometimes I agree with you, but not this time. Surely it is linked to religion. It’s a theological / philosophical belief.

Every law is based on a philosophical belief, this is no different.

 

[Vanny]

Yes this. Absolutely this. I think she is a fantastic pick.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Erikaspirit16:

she’s been a good friend of the corporate elite. The common man? Not so much!

Actually I don’t think it matters that much who is appointed to replace RBG. This is because I fully expect the Christ to Return next year. When He is here, all people (including the courts and SCOTUS) will look to him for guidance on all issues - the ideology of the judge will take second place if any.

The Christ’s priorities have always been for the common man, the poor, the disadvantaged, especially those in desperate need like refugees. In fact I think many of the corporate friendly judges will resign after he comes. The next President will then have many positions to fill

Do you have a source for this?

It couldn’t come a moment too soon for me.

 

[Vanny]

I think if they go down that road it may well backfire. I doubt they will be able to smear her character, so her faith is where they go. Also they may go after that she was part of a charismatic group.
ALready I read on Rod Dreher’s blog that a group of pentecostal African America Pastors have defended her faith and said they hope her faith is not attacked.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

Breaking promises is not lying.

If you say so.

Indeed I do “say so”.

Lying is speaking contrary to one’s mind, contrary to one’s perception of the truth.

Breaking a promise is not a good thing, but it is not lying. Let’s say I promise to deliver an automatic weapon to a customer in my gun store. Then I find out that he intends to use that weapon to kill people. Yes, I’m going to break my promise. In this case, it would actually be sinful to keep my promise.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

Do you have a source for this?

If he has one, then it isn’t true.

No man may know the day or the hour.

 

[AshCat]

Thanks for posting the bumper sticker!

I always liked something Bono of U2 said when asked if he believes in Karma.

He said, “I don’t believe in Karma. I believe in Grace”.

 

[27lw]

How are they going to smear her for being Catholic, without smearing their own nominee?
I guess they could just call her an extremist?

 

[27lw]

Trump doesn’t always do what’s expected anyway. Might all be spilled ink for no reason.