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

[Lysistrata]

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?

If justices on our high court are members of certain religions, shouldn't there be justices of other religions, including Pagans, and even including people who are atheists?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

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?

If justices on our high court are members of certain religions, shouldn't there be justices of other religions, including Pagans, and even including people who are atheists?

Why?

 

[AZGAL]

I am sure that many people will cringe at Trump's efforts to pick the next justice. I do not mind Gorsuch. Unfortunately this time the stakes are higher and the president seems a little frenzied in his pick. This lady lacks the experience the court needs and there is already Kagan who had little courtroom experience. The best the Congress can do is delay delay delay...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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.

Trump did not interpret the law he is given the authority to declare immigration matters in these cases. As reaffirmed by the Supreme Court.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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?

If justices on our high court are members of certain religions, shouldn't there be justices of other religions, including Pagans, and even including people who are atheists?

Again for the slow and stupid there is no religious test for holding Government office.

 

[Lysistrata]

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?

If justices on our high court are members of certain religions, shouldn't there be justices of other religions, including Pagans, and even including people who are atheists?

Again for the slow and stupid there is no religious test for holding Government office.

How do we Americans protect ourselves from those who would get into a government office and then abuse the powers of their offices to impose their beliefs on other Americans? Amy and her stud-muffin can f*ck themselves silly according to their chosen ideology. What they do in their bedroom is their own business. But Americans must have the guarantee that she will not bring her ideology to the bench. Not another sex-kitten scalia.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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?

If justices on our high court are members of certain religions, shouldn't there be justices of other religions, including Pagans, and even including people who are atheists?

Again for the slow and stupid there is no religious test for holding Government office.

How do we Americans protect ourselves from those who would get into a government office and then abuse the powers of their offices to impose their beliefs on other Americans? Amy and her stud-muffin can f*ck themselves silly according to their chosen ideology. What they do in their bedroom is their own business. But Americans must have the guarantee that she will not bring her ideology to the bench. Not another sex-kitten scalia.

And you have her decisions from the bench since she is already a sitting Judge, be VERY specific and point to any where she did any such thing.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So who is opposing her because she is a Christian?

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

If justices on our high court are members of certain religions, shouldn't there be justices of other religions, including Pagans, and even including people who are atheists?

Again for the slow and stupid there is no religious test for holding Government office.

How do we Americans protect ourselves from those who would get into a government office and then abuse the powers of their offices to impose their beliefs on other Americans? Amy and her stud-muffin can f*ck themselves silly according to their chosen ideology. What they do in their bedroom is their own business. But Americans must have the guarantee that she will not bring her ideology to the bench. Not another sex-kitten scalia.

And you have her decisions from the bench since she is already a sitting Judge, be VERY specific and point to any where she did any such thing.[/QU

Look at the rulings of acalia, the transcirpts of oral arguments in front of sitting judges. Scalia brought his personal biases with him. There really is no procedure for removing a sitting judge on the Supreme Court after that judge is elevated to the bench, even when this person brings his or her personal biases with them.

Again you have ZERO evidence she will do anything except rule on the law. If you did you would post it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So who is opposing her because she is a Christian?

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

If justices on our high court are members of certain religions, shouldn't there be justices of other religions, including Pagans, and even including people who are atheists?

Again for the slow and stupid there is no religious test for holding Government office.

How do we Americans protect ourselves from those who would get into a government office and then abuse the powers of their offices to impose their beliefs on other Americans? Amy and her stud-muffin can f*ck themselves silly according to their chosen ideology. What they do in their bedroom is their own business. But Americans must have the guarantee that she will not bring her ideology to the bench. Not another sex-kitten scalia.

And you have her decisions from the bench since she is already a sitting Judge, be VERY specific and point to any where she did any such thing.[/QU

Look at the rulings of sacalia, the transcirpts of oral arguments in front of sitting judges. Scalia brought his personal biases with him to the bench. He even made speeches to Catholic audiences as to how he intended to rule in favor of the religion. There really is no procedure for removing a sitting judge on the Supreme Court after that judge is elevated to the bench, even when this person brings his or her personal biases with them.

Learn how to use the quote feature please.

 

[Lysistrata]

If justices on our high court are members of certain religions, shouldn't there be justices of other religions, including Pagans, and even including people who are atheists?

Again for the slow and stupid there is no religious test for holding Government office.

How do we Americans protect ourselves from those who would get into a government office and then abuse the powers of their offices to impose their beliefs on other Americans? Amy and her stud-muffin can f*ck themselves silly according to their chosen ideology. What they do in their bedroom is their own business. But Americans must have the guarantee that she will not bring her ideology to the bench. Not another sex-kitten scalia.

And you have her decisions from the bench since she is already a sitting Judge, be VERY specific and point to any where she did any such thing.[/QU

Look at the rulings of sacalia, the transcirpts of oral arguments in front of sitting judges. Scalia brought his personal biases with him to the bench. He even made speeches to Catholic audiences as to how he intended to rule in favor of the religion. There really is no procedure for removing a sitting judge on the Supreme Court after that judge is elevated to the bench, even when this person brings his or her personal biases with them.

Learn how to use the quote feature please.

I will, albeit that it is confusing. but my comment still stands, even if I screw up in my typing.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Again for the slow and stupid there is no religious test for holding Government office.

How do we Americans protect ourselves from those who would get into a government office and then abuse the powers of their offices to impose their beliefs on other Americans? Amy and her stud-muffin can f*ck themselves silly according to their chosen ideology. What they do in their bedroom is their own business. But Americans must have the guarantee that she will not bring her ideology to the bench. Not another sex-kitten scalia.

And you have her decisions from the bench since she is already a sitting Judge, be VERY specific and point to any where she did any such thing.[/QU

Look at the rulings of sacalia, the transcirpts of oral arguments in front of sitting judges. Scalia brought his personal biases with him to the bench. He even made speeches to Catholic audiences as to how he intended to rule in favor of the religion. There really is no procedure for removing a sitting judge on the Supreme Court after that judge is elevated to the bench, even when this person brings his or her personal biases with them.

Learn how to use the quote feature please.

I will, albeit that it is confusing. but my comment still stands, even if I screw up in my typing.

Yet you have no link to back up any complaint about her none nada zero.

 

[Lysistrata]

She is not on the court. I am just watchful against anyone like scalia. The only thing that I know about her is that she is Catholic and got knocked up seven times. Scalia got somebody knocked up eight times. I think that this is a Catholic "thing," but it is no secret that scalia bragged about how he would bring his religious sect into his rulings.

 

[Coyote]

Supreme Court candidates' views on abortion under scrutiny

She has spoken publicly about her conviction that life begins at conception, and in a 2003 law journal article, she argued that courts could be more flexible in overturning prior "errors" in precedent. She noted that courts have struggled over when to keep "an erroneous decision" on the books, citing as an example Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a major 1992 Supreme Court ruling that upheld Roe.

 

[skookerasbil]

The party for women's equality!!

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[skookerasbil]

Gonna be an awesome few months. We'll see Trump march women, blacks and Latinos....up for nomination and the party that claims to be the only hope for women, blacks and Latinos will be slamming the door on all!! "Fuck You!!". Yuk...yuk....gonna be a hoot to watch s0ns!

 

[Lysistrata]

Supreme Court candidates' views on abortion under scrutiny

She has spoken publicly about her conviction that life begins at conception, and in a 2003 law journal article, she argued that courts could be more flexible in overturning prior "errors" in precedent. She noted that courts have struggled over when to keep "an erroneous decision" on the books, citing as an example Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a major 1992 Supreme Court ruling that upheld Roe.

Thank you for doing the research. It does reveal her religion-based bias.

 

[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?

If justices on our high court are members of certain religions, shouldn't there be justices of other religions, including Pagans, and even including people who are atheists?

Well....the Constitution is quite clear that there can be no religious test to hold any office in the United States- so there is no legal reason to even know a candidates religion.

As far as the Supreme Court goes- we know that there have been and are Christians- and Jews on the court. Probably an atheist somewhere in the lot.

Given how Supreme Court justices are chosen- we will not likely have a justice who admits to any other faith chosen in our lifetime.

 

[Syriusly]

Gonna be an awesome few months. We'll see Trump march women, blacks and Latinos....up for nomination and the party that claims to be the only hope for women, blacks and Latinos will be slamming the door on all!! "Fuck You!!". Yuk...yuk....gonna be a hoot to watch s0ns!

Well lets see....the last woman appointed to the Supreme Court by the Republicans was Sandra Day O'Connor......the last Latino appointed to the Supreme Court by Republicans was....no one.

Heck I think it would be great showmanship on Trumps part to name a woman- or an African American.

But I will be content if he names someone qualified.

His record with the lower courts hasn't been stellar in qualified judges.

 

[Syriusly]

Supreme Court candidates' views on abortion under scrutiny

She has spoken publicly about her conviction that life begins at conception, and in a 2003 law journal article, she argued that courts could be more flexible in overturning prior "errors" in precedent. She noted that courts have struggled over when to keep "an erroneous decision" on the books, citing as an example Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a major 1992 Supreme Court ruling that upheld Roe.

But the Trumpkins will package her opposition to abortion as being her religious views- and any opposition to her for her views on abortion- as being attacks on her as a Christian.