In SCOTUS Confirmation Fight, Expect Democrats To Embrace Anti-Catholic Bigotry

Catholics, like anyone, has a right to explain how their religious affirmation infuses their legal philsophy,


There is no religious test for holding office.....

How many times do we have to explain it to you doofuses.......?

Judges have no right to impose their religious beliefs on anyone else. This is not Iran. We do not need Taliban Catholics.
 
Being concerned about the role religion plays in her decisions is not "anti-catholic" bigotry. As I recall, there was a lot of talk on Sotemyer and how her heritage as a hispanic woman would influence her decisions. To automatically presume anti-catholic bigotry is putting the horse before the cart and pretty disengenius.

~~~~~~
Was that similar to the remarks of Sen. Feinstein?
"Elected Democrats have been even more frank about their antipathy towards Catholics, even to the point of appearing to support an anti-Catholic religious test for nominees to the federal bench. It was during Barrett’s 2017 confirmation to the federal appellate court that Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein admitted openly that the judge’s Catholic faith was a problem for her, infamously telling Barrett, “the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.”
True to their historial ideology going back to the post Civil War era of KKK, Democrats use their positions to physically and literally lynch blacks, Catholics and Republicans every chance they get....

What did she say about Scalia? Alito? Roberts? Thomas? Sotomayor?

~~~~~~
You'd have to ask Se, Feinstein personally for the answer....
 
Catholics, like anyone, has a right to explain how their religious affirmation infuses their legal philsophy,


There is no religious test for holding office.....

How many times do we have to explain it to you doofuses.......?

Judges have no right to impose their religious beliefs on anyone else. This is not Iran. We do not need Taliban Catholics.


The only politician(s) I have referred directly to her religion is Nancy Pelosi claiming her religion taught her to love everyone and not to hate. But her actions speak louder than her words.....
XXXXXXXXXXXX​
 
Last edited:
In SCOTUS Confirmation Fight, Expect Democrats To Embrace Anti-Catholic Bigotry
Bigotry against Catholics is nothing new in America. What’s new is Democrats’ wholesale embrace of it, which we might see play out in primetime.


22 Sep 2020 ~ By John Daniel Davidson

President Trump is expected to pick a Supreme Court nominee to fill the seat left vacant by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as early as the end of this week. Two of the people on Trump’s short list of possible nominees are Catholic women: Amy Coney Barrett, a federal appellate court judge in Chicago, and Barbara Lagoa, a federal appellate court judge in Atlanta.
If either of these eminently qualified judges gets the nomination, expect the media to go full-throttle with anti-Catholic bigotry. And expect Democrats to outdo the media in this regard, which is no easy task.
The media has wasted no time casting aspersions on Barrett for her Catholic faith. On Monday, the Washington Post ran a kind of explainer on Barrett, which included an out-of-context quote from a talk she apparently gave years ago, that a “legal career is but a means to an end… and that end is building the Kingdom of God.”
The statement itself, even without context, is an altogether ordinary expression of sincere religious belief that any devout person, whether Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or Muslim, would readily affirm. Yet the Post’s Ron Charles highlighted it in a tweet Monday, as if to warn us that Barrett might try to usher in a Catholic theocracy if she gets onto the Supreme Court.
Also Monday, Newsweek published a somewhat hysterical piece about how Barrett is affiliated with a Christian religious group, People of Praise, that served as the inspiration for “The Handmaid’s Tale”—as if Barrett, a woman on the president’s short list for the Supreme Court, somehow exemplifies the oppression of women by a religious patriarchy. (Update: Newsweek posted a correction to this piece Tuesday, saying Margaret Atwood never mentioned People of Praise as an inspiration for “The Handmaid’s Tale,” which calls into question the entire point of the article. The social media headline, however, remains unchanged.)
Elected Democrats have been even more frank about their antipathy towards Catholics, even to the point of appearing to support an anti-Catholic religious test for nominees to the federal bench. It was during Barrett’s 2017 confirmation to the federal appellate court that Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein admitted openly that the judge’s Catholic faith was a problem for her, infamously telling Barrett, “the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.”
During those same confirmation hearings, Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin grilled Barrett on her faith, suggesting there’s something nefarious about being an “orthodox Catholic” and asking her, “Do you consider yourself an orthodox Catholic?” She replied, “I am a Catholic, Senator Durbin.”
~[snip]~
Anti-Catholic Bigotry Is a Very Old Problem in America
For years now, leftists in the media have been wondering out loud if there are too many Catholics on the court, implying over and over again that Catholics are less likely to serve the public interest than any other group. We saw it after the Hobby Lobby ruling in 2014, we’ve seen it with Trump’s appointments to the federal appellate court, and we’ll almost certainly see a very ugly and open version of it if he nominates Barrett or Lagoa.
All of this is just the latest iteration of an old problem in America. Through much of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Catholics were suspected of dual loyalties at best, at worst loyalty to Rome. They were shunned, maligned, and discriminated against by the Protestant mainstream in various ways, perhaps most infamously by the so-called Blaine Amendments in the 1880s, which barred state funds for Catholic schools.
~[snip]~
While anti-Catholic attitudes might have softened over the last 60 years—John F. Kennedy, Jr., didn’t face nearly the same hostility for being a Catholic in 1960 that New York Gov. Al Smith did as the Democratic presidential candidate in 1928—they have not gone away. Among the leftists who now control the Democratic Party, they have become quietly commonplace.
Today, being anti-Catholic is one of the last acceptable prejudices in polite liberal society, and if Trump nominates a Catholic to the Supreme Court, we’re going to see its ugliness on full display once again.


Comment:
Meanwhile their hypocisy will be at their height because their presidential candidate is also "Catholic".
Also, can we recollect when the hag Pelosi invoked religious obligation last fall during the impeachment? I seem to remember lots of talk of sacred duties. But then duplicity never seems to bother the left.
Read:
XXXXXXXXXXXX​
!

To the DNC, Pelosi and China Joe, the Trump choices of Barrett or Lagoa are the wrong type of Catholics.
A good example of what will be happening is the following hilarious call left on yesterday to the "Howie Carr Show's Chump Line":
"Hello,Police...I'd like to report that I was tortured and raped by whoever Trump nominates for the Supreme Court".


ohyeahzzzzzzz.jpeg
 
I'm guessing the reason why Pres. Trump isn't taking his time to elect Ruth replacement. He probably want to exposed the RINOs before election day. .
But then these RINOs knows that whom he is considering for the replacement is a undercover RINO. Maybe all of his nominees are undercover RINOs.
Pres. Trump need to take his time.
 
By the way in the Senate, Republicans only won 44% vote compared to 55% who voted for Democrats.
Trump won 46.1% the vote to 48.2% to his opponent.

This should be enough of a reason, people wanted a different government.
 
Catholics, like anyone, has a right to explain how their religious affirmation infuses their legal philsophy,


There is no religious test for holding office.....

How many times do we have to explain it to you doofuses.......?

Judges have no right to impose their religious beliefs on anyone else. This is not Iran. We do not need Taliban Catholics.


The only politician(s) I have referred directly to her religion is Nancy Pelosi claiming her religion taught her to love everyone and not to hate. But her actions speak louder than her words.....
XXXXXXXXXXXX​
If so, she is wrong, and so is Barrett.
 
Being concerned about the role religion plays in her decisions is not "anti-catholic" bigotry. As I recall, there was a lot of talk on Sotemyer and how her heritage as a hispanic woman would influence her decisions. To automatically presume anti-catholic bigotry is putting the horse before the cart and pretty disengenius.

She is Catholic
 
In SCOTUS Confirmation Fight, Expect Democrats To Embrace Anti-Catholic Bigotry
Bigotry against Catholics is nothing new in America. What’s new is Democrats’ wholesale embrace of it, which we might see play out in primetime.


22 Sep 2020 ~ By John Daniel Davidson

President Trump is expected to pick a Supreme Court nominee to fill the seat left vacant by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as early as the end of this week. Two of the people on Trump’s short list of possible nominees are Catholic women: Amy Coney Barrett, a federal appellate court judge in Chicago, and Barbara Lagoa, a federal appellate court judge in Atlanta.
If either of these eminently qualified judges gets the nomination, expect the media to go full-throttle with anti-Catholic bigotry. And expect Democrats to outdo the media in this regard, which is no easy task.
The media has wasted no time casting aspersions on Barrett for her Catholic faith. On Monday, the Washington Post ran a kind of explainer on Barrett, which included an out-of-context quote from a talk she apparently gave years ago, that a “legal career is but a means to an end… and that end is building the Kingdom of God.”
The statement itself, even without context, is an altogether ordinary expression of sincere religious belief that any devout person, whether Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or Muslim, would readily affirm. Yet the Post’s Ron Charles highlighted it in a tweet Monday, as if to warn us that Barrett might try to usher in a Catholic theocracy if she gets onto the Supreme Court.
Also Monday, Newsweek published a somewhat hysterical piece about how Barrett is affiliated with a Christian religious group, People of Praise, that served as the inspiration for “The Handmaid’s Tale”—as if Barrett, a woman on the president’s short list for the Supreme Court, somehow exemplifies the oppression of women by a religious patriarchy. (Update: Newsweek posted a correction to this piece Tuesday, saying Margaret Atwood never mentioned People of Praise as an inspiration for “The Handmaid’s Tale,” which calls into question the entire point of the article. The social media headline, however, remains unchanged.)
Elected Democrats have been even more frank about their antipathy towards Catholics, even to the point of appearing to support an anti-Catholic religious test for nominees to the federal bench. It was during Barrett’s 2017 confirmation to the federal appellate court that Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein admitted openly that the judge’s Catholic faith was a problem for her, infamously telling Barrett, “the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.”
During those same confirmation hearings, Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin grilled Barrett on her faith, suggesting there’s something nefarious about being an “orthodox Catholic” and asking her, “Do you consider yourself an orthodox Catholic?” She replied, “I am a Catholic, Senator Durbin.”
~[snip]~
Anti-Catholic Bigotry Is a Very Old Problem in America
For years now, leftists in the media have been wondering out loud if there are too many Catholics on the court, implying over and over again that Catholics are less likely to serve the public interest than any other group. We saw it after the Hobby Lobby ruling in 2014, we’ve seen it with Trump’s appointments to the federal appellate court, and we’ll almost certainly see a very ugly and open version of it if he nominates Barrett or Lagoa.
All of this is just the latest iteration of an old problem in America. Through much of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Catholics were suspected of dual loyalties at best, at worst loyalty to Rome. They were shunned, maligned, and discriminated against by the Protestant mainstream in various ways, perhaps most infamously by the so-called Blaine Amendments in the 1880s, which barred state funds for Catholic schools.
~[snip]~
While anti-Catholic attitudes might have softened over the last 60 years—John F. Kennedy, Jr., didn’t face nearly the same hostility for being a Catholic in 1960 that New York Gov. Al Smith did as the Democratic presidential candidate in 1928—they have not gone away. Among the leftists who now control the Democratic Party, they have become quietly commonplace.
Today, being anti-Catholic is one of the last acceptable prejudices in polite liberal society, and if Trump nominates a Catholic to the Supreme Court, we’re going to see its ugliness on full display once again.


Comment:
Meanwhile their hypocisy will be at their height because their presidential candidate is also "Catholic".
Also, can we recollect when the hag Pelosi invoked religious obligation last fall during the impeachment? I seem to remember lots of talk of sacred duties. But then duplicity never seems to bother the left.
Read:
XXXXXXXXXXXX​
!

To the DNC, Pelosi and China Joe, the Trump choices of Barrett or Lagoa are the wrong type of Catholics.
A good example of what will be happening is the following hilarious call left on yesterday to the "Howie Carr Show's Chump Line":
"Hello,Police...I'd like to report that I was tortured and raped by whoever Trump nominates for the Supreme Court".

There is no anti-Catholic bigotry. This is not a theocracy and anyone who wants to impose their religious beliefs on the country are the enemy of the country. We already have 4 justices who believe the church is above the law. Who want to impose their religious beliefs on others.
What if the religion is Communism?
 
Catholics, like anyone, has a right to explain how their religious affirmation infuses their legal philsophy,


There is no religious test for holding office.....

How many times do we have to explain it to you doofuses.......?

Judges have no right to impose their religious beliefs on anyone else. This is not Iran. We do not need Taliban Catholics.
Yup, no anti-Catholic bigotry here. Move along, citizens, move along.
 
Since we seem headed for quota-by-religion, I hereby demand that we historically under-represented DRUIDS be mandated a seat on The U.S. Supreme Court. Fail and we'll invoke The Oak Trees to ambush passing bigots with acorns fired as from machine guns!

All we ask is equality. No equality; no peace. We Druids have our ways!
 
The Left loses their shit over Catholics on the Supreme Court yet tell US that we must be more open minded on Sharia Law in the US and that we should look to foreign law when interpreting our law???
 

Forum List

Back
Top