Progressives scrambles to block potential Supreme Court nominee Amy C. Barrett because she is a ...

[hadit]

A SCOTUS who values millenia old fairy tales over the Constitution is a terrible puck

Obama claimed to be Christian. Did you have a problem with that?

Was it Obama’s job to objectively judge the law? Did he use thousands years old magical beliefs as justification for opposing freedoms?

Non sequitur. Answer the question.

It’s a terrible comparison, but didn’t bother me even the slightest

The only way that is true is if you didn't believe he actually meant a word of it.

 

[hadit]

I have more of a problem with the right ignoring an ounce of Prevention is capitally Worth, a pound of cure.

Answer the question.

the right wing implied he was Muslim.

Irrelevant to this issue. He claimed to be Christian. Did you have a problem with it?

Don’t expect an honest answer from these leftist hypocrites. They see any Christians as wackos unless of course they are Dem Christians.

We see fundie nutjobs that want to limit freedoms because of millenia old magical instructions as wackos. Get it right.

Does she?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

They'll do anything to stop a Christian, but would absolutely celebrate a Muslim fundie getting on there.

 

[Coyote]

Progressives Scramble To Block Potential Supreme Court Nominee Amy Coney Barrett Because She Is A Committed Christian - The American Dream
There is a lot of buzz that Amy Coney Barrett is going to be President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, and that is causing many progressives to totally freak out. The reason that they are freaking out doesn’t have anything to do with her credentials. In fact, as you will see below, Barrett is exceptionally qualified to be on the Supreme Court. She is sharp, intelligent and has a sterling reputation. But the left is already throwing a massive temper tantrum even though she isn’t the nominee yet for one very simple reason. Amy Coney Barrett is a committed Christian, and progressives are deathly afraid that her Christian values will influence her decisions on social issues.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Oh no we can't have a Christian in there I mean God forbid getting someone in there who would actualy judge fairly, or might have compassion unlike these loser fks who want to make everything and anything unethical , ethical because they think their power to control is above everyone else.

Let's get someone in there who isn't an ANTIFA fk.

Mindwars. There ARE Christians on the SCOTUS. Five Catholics and an Episcopalian.

 

[BlackFlag]

A SCOTUS who values millenia old fairy tales over the Constitution is a terrible puck

Obama claimed to be Christian. Did you have a problem with that?

Was it Obama’s job to objectively judge the law? Did he use thousands years old magical beliefs as justification for opposing freedoms?

Non sequitur. Answer the question.

It’s a terrible comparison, but didn’t bother me even the slightest

The only way that is true is if you didn't believe he actually meant a word of it.

If he meant it doesn’t matter. Did he act on it? You fools like to say Obama opposed gay marriage once. You don’t realize that doesn’t matter in the slightest because he did not act on it.

 

[BlackFlag]

They'll do anything to stop a Christian, but would absolutely celebrate a Muslim fundie getting on there.

Christian fundie, Muslim fundie... not much difference when you remove constitutional protections against their madness.

 

[Coyote]

They'll do anything to stop a Christian, but would absolutely celebrate a Muslim fundie getting on there.

The Scotus majority are Christian, including one of the two appointed by a Democrat, Obama.

 

[AZGAL]

Ms. Barrett's obsession is a legal principle called the doctrine of stare decisis—

Consider, for example, the opening sentence of the 1992 abortion decision, Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pennsylvania v. Casey. The case involved the question of whether to uphold or overturn the precedent set in Roe v. Wade, the landmark abortion decision of 1973. Justice O’Connor’s opinion in the Casey case sums up stare decisis in nine words: "Liberty finds no refuge in a jurisprudence of doubt."
Stare decisis applies downward, but not horizontally.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Non sequitur. Answer the question.

It’s a terrible comparison, but didn’t bother me even the slightest

So a SCOTUS justice who is Christian making decisions affecting the entire country is a problem, but the same for Obama is not.

I understand. It is as I suspected.

Is it the President’s job to interpret laws? Nope, dipshit.

Non sequitur. That is not the issue.

And, you hide badly.

It is the issue. Obama did not use religion to oppress. It is also not a Presiden’t job to interpret the constitution. When the Constitution is considered secondary to religious law by an interpreter, that’s a problem.

Seek psychiatric assistance. You're a very confused individual.

 

[BlackFlag]

It’s a terrible comparison, but didn’t bother me even the slightest

So a SCOTUS justice who is Christian making decisions affecting the entire country is a problem, but the same for Obama is not.

I understand. It is as I suspected.

Is it the President’s job to interpret laws? Nope, dipshit.

Non sequitur. That is not the issue.

And, you hide badly.

It is the issue. Obama did not use religion to oppress. It is also not a Presiden’t job to interpret the constitution. When the Constitution is considered secondary to religious law by an interpreter, that’s a problem.

Seek psychiatric assistance. You're a very confused individual.

Thank you for conceding.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

So a SCOTUS justice who is Christian making decisions affecting the entire country is a problem, but the same for Obama is not.

I understand. It is as I suspected.

Is it the President’s job to interpret laws? Nope, dipshit.

Non sequitur. That is not the issue.

And, you hide badly.

It is the issue. Obama did not use religion to oppress. It is also not a Presiden’t job to interpret the constitution. When the Constitution is considered secondary to religious law by an interpreter, that’s a problem.

Seek psychiatric assistance. You're a very confused individual.

Thank you for conceding.

I see my assessment stands.

 

[Lysistrata]

The American people need to have a guarantee that the people on the High Court will not interpret the United States Constitution through the prism of their chosen beliefs/lifestyles. We are entitled to this as Americans. People such as scalia telegraphed through their speeches away from the court building that they would look at their cases according to their own personal lifestyles and biases. This is not what the American People deserve on the Court. Nobody cares how and when SCOTUS justices have sex. We do care if they bring their biases into the courtroom and deliver opinions that impose their chosen lifestyles on the rest of the country.

 

[hadit]

Obama claimed to be Christian. Did you have a problem with that?

Was it Obama’s job to objectively judge the law? Did he use thousands years old magical beliefs as justification for opposing freedoms?

Non sequitur. Answer the question.

It’s a terrible comparison, but didn’t bother me even the slightest

The only way that is true is if you didn't believe he actually meant a word of it.

If he meant it doesn’t matter. Did he act on it? You fools like to say Obama opposed gay marriage once. You don’t realize that doesn’t matter in the slightest because he did not act on it.

Likewise, it doesn't matter if Trump's nominee is a Catholic if she doesn't act on it.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

A SCOTUS who values millenia old fairy tales over the Constitution is a terrible pick

Why is it that some people just don't get that we are a nation of secular laws....not a theocracy.

Nonsense.
Our system is based on Judaeo Christian principles as it's guide. That is obvious with plenty of writings to back it up.
The founding fathers however wisely wanted there to be a separation between church and state...that did not mean void of religion. That meant not tied together like the Kingdoms of Europe of that time period and before. Where corruption of religion was rampant.
They were not worried about government getting influenced by religion, rather religion influenced by government.

 

[Lysistrata]

A SCOTUS who values millenia old fairy tales over the Constitution is a terrible pick

Why is it that some people just don't get that we are a nation of secular laws....not a theocracy.

Nonsense.
Our system is based on Judaeo Christian principles as it's guide. That is obvious with plenty of writings to back it up.
The founding fathers however wisely wanted there to be a separation between church and state...that did not mean void of religion. That meant not tied together like the Kingdoms of Europe of that time period and before. Where corruption of religion was rampant.
They were not worried about government getting influenced by religion, rather religion influenced by government.

You have it backwards.
You do understand that there is not one religion, don't you/? Even in colonial times. BTW: you are only speaking of European settlers here, not the Native American population already here.The Christian European settlers never agreed on any religious question? They all did.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

A SCOTUS who values millenia old fairy tales over the Constitution is a terrible pick

Why is it that some people just don't get that we are a nation of secular laws....not a theocracy.

Nonsense.
Our system is based on Judaeo Christian principles as it's guide. That is obvious with plenty of writings to back it up.
The founding fathers however wisely wanted there to be a separation between church and state...that did not mean void of religion. That meant not tied together like the Kingdoms of Europe of that time period and before. Where corruption of religion was rampant.
They were not worried about government getting influenced by religion, rather religion influenced by government.

You have it backwards.

Nope... you were just taught one side of the story.
BTW - I am not religious. But I don't just go by what I am told.

 

[theHawk]

A SCOTUS who values millenia old fairy tales over the Constitution is a terrible pick

Any proof that she actually will put her Catholic beliefs ahead of the Constitution? She's been a judge for a while, surely your favorite web sites can find something she's done that you don't like.

That is why she is being considered for nomination. If she had a significant number of rulings that did not prioritize mystical beliefs, she would not be considered.

Sure bub, because the MSM says so and you must parrot it.

 

[PredFan]

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

A SCOTUS who values millenia old fairy tales over the Constitution is a terrible pick

Bet you cheered Sotomayor and her "experiences" influence her decisions.

 

[Syriusly]

Progressives Scramble To Block Potential Supreme Court Nominee Amy Coney Barrett Because She Is A Committed Christian - The American Dream
There is a lot of buzz that Amy Coney Barrett is going to be President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, and that is causing many progressives to totally freak out. The reason that they are freaking out doesn’t have anything to do with her credentials. In fact, as you will see below, Barrett is exceptionally qualified to be on the Supreme Court. She is sharp, intelligent and has a sterling reputation. But the left is already throwing a massive temper tantrum even though she isn’t the nominee yet for one very simple reason. Amy Coney Barrett is a committed Christian, and progressives are deathly afraid that her Christian values will influence her decisions on social issues.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Oh no we can't have a Christian in there I mean God forbid getting someone in there who would actualy judge fairly, or might have compassion unlike these loser fks who want to make everything and anything unethical , ethical because they think their power to control is above everyone else.

Let's get someone in there who isn't an ANTIFA fk.

So who is opposing her because she is a Christian?

And why didn't they oppose all of the other Christians on the court?