She did not know? Give me a break.

[Luissa]

I'm almost 100% positive Jillian was comparing your remarks to the Elders of Zion. Perhaps she'll enlighten us when she gets back.

What exactly did Luissa post that was bashing Catholics?

notice how they didn't post any quotes where I bashed catholics, kind of hard to when there are none. If they didn't want me to prove they are a Pro Life group they should have not asked me to.

I dunno, Luissa, I think they are still reeling from losing Palin and are off their game. I know you didn't bash Catholics. Being a non-practicing Catholic makes me sensitive to these things.

I guess I should be offended by myself also since my father took us to the catholic church anytime my two brother and sister who are catholic were in town, along with the fact I have two neices who go to a catholic high school.

 

[Luissa]

I'm getting worried about RGS. Two threads in one day that make him look too stupid to be considered retarded.

 

[MaggieMae]

Fact check: Did she know about the abortion briefs? - Yahoo! News

She was there and knew full well what the position of the group was, what their intent was and how they were going about ensuring that intent was backed with legal work and action.

Simple enough, if she is confirmed she should be REQUIRED to step down on any decision involving this group or abortion in general.

Did you even read your cited article?

The record is murky on this. Here's what we know: Sotomayor was on the board from 1980 to 1992 and headed its litigation committee. During that time, PRLDEF filed briefs arguing against abortion restrictions. Anti-abortion groups have cited those briefs in their opposition to Sotomayor's nomination.

In an interview with the AP, Cesar Perales, the head of the legal advocacy group, said Sotomayor had no direct involvement with the group's legal activities.

"She was on the board of directors, she was not a member of the legal staff, so she was not directly involved in the legal arguments that we presented," Perales said. "Her role was to help us raise funds, set policy, hire the person who would run the organization."

 

[MaggieMae]

So I quess Scalia who is strongly against abortion should not be apart of any decision regarding abortion either?

Has he EVER served on a group working to change Supreme Court rulings for abortion? Did he ever belong to a specific group working ONLY for that races agenda? Both indicate prejudice and would make that persons objectivity highly in doubt in regards those matters.

Do try and keep up.

Perhaps you can cite for us any Supreme Court decision he has made that would indicate non impartiality on the subject?

The most recent of course is Cheney v. United States District Court for the District of Columbia, a case dealing with the right of the Vice President to keep secret the membership of an advisory task force on energy policy. Scalia refused to recuse himself from the case even as he thought it "appropriate" to go duck hunting with the plaintiff.

 

[MaggieMae]

Well let's see he is catholic and has give speeches at catholic schools. And if I am not mistaken Catholics are one of the largest groups who speaks out against abortion. He has also given interviews and speeches speaking against abortion.

Antoine Scalia is probably the most so-called "activist" judges on the bench.

 

[MaggieMae]

This thread is retarded for precisely the reasons Luissa pointed out.

Luissa is a poster I like. However that post of her's above was basically Catholic bashing and hinting at something along the lines of 'Jews using Muslim baby blood for matzo bread.'

So, do you think the Senate democrats have just suddenly decided not to have a problem with the 6th Catholic on the SCOTUS? Or could it be, like Editec they are just in the 'fuck you' category?

Louissa simply responded to Sarge's question.

 

[MaggieMae]

Well let's see he is catholic and has give speeches at catholic schools. And if I am not mistaken Catholics are one of the largest groups who speaks out against abortion. He has also given interviews and speeches speaking against abortion.

He also attends Red Mass every year along with the other Pro Life members of the court, which is said to be a vehicle for the vatican to get their policies and plans for the next year out. With one of their policies being Pro Life, I have to wonder what is the difference between the two?

What Is the Red Mass?

In other words, you got nothing.

Barry's Mentor and FORMER Paster is an Abject Racist...

Well, he was... Before Barry tossed him under the Bus, wedged between the fender and his Racist Cracker Grandmother.

Barry didn't Know... It's a Theme with this Kid.



peace...

And that has to do with....??? Tell us, creepy one, do you stick it in your arm or just smoke it?

 

[MaggieMae]

RGS can see into the minds of other people and know what they know. What a talent!

It seems abortion will always be the hypocrite's moral crutch because nothing is required of the anti-choice person. When nothing is demanded of you you can preach to others easily and support laws on their personal freedom. The greatest irony remains the very same people supported an unjust and illegal war and do not support preventive measures such as condoms. But again that is because the issue is just an abstraction to salve their moral hypocrisy.

And.

'Conservative media distort Ginsburg interview to claim she "thought Roe v. Wade was a way to weed out undesirables"'

Conservative media distort Ginsburg interview to claim she "thought Roe v. Wade was a way to weed out undesirables" | Media Matters for America

'Justice Ginsburg: "Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don't know why this hasn't been said more often."'

Conservative media distorts? Ohhhhh noooooo, say it isn't so!! Are there more examples of this chicanery?