The Christian Group Amy Coney Barrett Belongs To

Lucy Hamilton

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
38,422
Reaction score
15,122
Points
1,590
The nearly 50-year-old group, founded and based in South Bend, Indiana, exerts considerable sway over members, according to published reports, leading to questions about what role — if any — it would have if Coney Barrett ascends to a life-time post in the highest court in the land.

Part of the focus in discussions of People of Praise is the “lifelong promise of love and service to fellow community members, … a covenant commitment,” that members make “which establishes our relationships as members of the People of Praise community,” according to the website, which added “our covenant is neither an oath nor a vow, but it is an important personal commitment” among people who “support each other financially and materially and spiritually.”

Members of People of Praise, which could not be reached for comment Saturday, also are said to be accountable to a same-sex adviser, called a “head” for men and—until recently—a “handmaiden” for women, who gives input on a wide variety of personal decisions.

1.3 billion: That was the estimated number of Roman Catholics in the world in 2018, according to the National Catholic Reporter. There were 51 million Catholics in the United States in 2018, according to the Pew Research Center. People of Praise counts about 1,700 members in 22 cities across the U.S., Canada, and the Caribbean, according to its website

Here’s What To Know About People Of Praise, The Christian Group Amy Coney Barrett Belongs To
Either link to an actual case she has influenced with her religious beliefs not the law or shut the hell up.
From what I have read there are NO cases where Judge Barrett's religious beliefs have influenced ANY cases she has ruled on. This is just another example of the Leftists aka Communists unhinged hysteria about a very qualified Judge and a very good decent FAMILY ORIENTATED woman, things that are like Kryptonite to the Leftists aka Communists.
 
OP
G

-Gemma-

Guest
Is this supposed to be a problem? Is that where we are headed with this? It's not going to have a role. Thanks for playing.
Idk. Do you believe it’s a problem?
However I do think it may have a role. Whether it’s a “problem” remains to be seen.
It's. Not. Going. To. Be. A. Problem. At. All.

Enough is enough, Gemma. You guys don't win the right to destroy someone or attempt to destroy one because politics/campaigning/etc. Stop politicizing the courts. Stop. You become part of the problem.
This is my very first post on this topic. Enough is enough ? Stay on the topic . And ftr the topic is not me.
the Topic is how this SC nom is able to balance her religious beliefs with the law she will be expected to uphold.
Now, speak on the topic. TIA
There is nothing in her judicial history that indicates she was influenced by this religious group.
Okay
 
OP
G

-Gemma-

Guest
Is this supposed to be a problem? Is that where we are headed with this? It's not going to have a role. Thanks for playing.
Idk. Do you believe it’s a problem?
However I do think it may have a role. Whether it’s a “problem” remains to be seen.
It's. Not. Going. To. Be. A. Problem. At. All.

Enough is enough, Gemma. You guys don't win the right to destroy someone or attempt to destroy one because politics/campaigning/etc. Stop politicizing the courts. Stop. You become part of the problem.
This is my very first post on this topic. Enough is enough ? Stay on the topic . And ftr the topic is not me.
the Topic is how this SC nom is able to balance her religious beliefs with the law she will be expected to uphold.
Now, speak on the topic. TIA
Her religious beliefs have never been a problem in her career. Get a life.
1- thanks for your reply
2- I don’t need another one. Piss off
 
OP
G

-Gemma-

Guest
Is this supposed to be a problem? Is that where we are headed with this? It's not going to have a role. Thanks for playing.
Idk. Do you believe it’s a problem?
However I do think it may have a role. Whether it’s a “problem” remains to be seen.
It's. Not. Going. To. Be. A. Problem. At. All.

Enough is enough, Gemma. You guys don't win the right to destroy someone or attempt to destroy one because politics/campaigning/etc. Stop politicizing the courts. Stop. You become part of the problem.
This is my very first post on this topic. Enough is enough ? Stay on the topic . And ftr the topic is not me.
the Topic is how this SC nom is able to balance her religious beliefs with the law she will be expected to uphold.
Now, speak on the topic. TIA
This is not your very first post and all of your posts have a common theme. I'm assuming that you took the time to go through her rulings? She has them. You have evidence. Show me that she is not capable. And you are now a part of the problem. Not a part of the solution.
Again, the op is not about me.
Please stay on topic.
please feel free to share with the group her list of rulings.
thank you !
 

Disir

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
22,762
Reaction score
5,134
Points
290
Is this supposed to be a problem? Is that where we are headed with this? It's not going to have a role. Thanks for playing.
Idk. Do you believe it’s a problem?
However I do think it may have a role. Whether it’s a “problem” remains to be seen.
It's. Not. Going. To. Be. A. Problem. At. All.

Enough is enough, Gemma. You guys don't win the right to destroy someone or attempt to destroy one because politics/campaigning/etc. Stop politicizing the courts. Stop. You become part of the problem.
This is my very first post on this topic. Enough is enough ? Stay on the topic . And ftr the topic is not me.
the Topic is how this SC nom is able to balance her religious beliefs with the law she will be expected to uphold.
Now, speak on the topic. TIA
This is not your very first post and all of your posts have a common theme. I'm assuming that you took the time to go through her rulings? She has them. You have evidence. Show me that she is not capable. And you are now a part of the problem. Not a part of the solution.
Again, the op is not about me.
Please stay on topic.
please feel free to share with the group her list of rulings.
thank you !
Show the rulings as evidence and it is all about you at this point.
 
OP
G

-Gemma-

Guest
Is this supposed to be a problem? Is that where we are headed with this? It's not going to have a role. Thanks for playing.
Idk. Do you believe it’s a problem?
However I do think it may have a role. Whether it’s a “problem” remains to be seen.
That it makes you mad, or uncomfortable, inspires me to join them..... :wink:
I am neither mad nor uncomfortable but if the good Lord moves you and you have the entry fee, have at it sweetheart! Godspeed!
 

Lucy Hamilton

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
38,422
Reaction score
15,122
Points
1,590
Is this supposed to be a problem? Is that where we are headed with this? It's not going to have a role. Thanks for playing.
Idk. Do you believe it’s a problem?
However I do think it may have a role. Whether it’s a “problem” remains to be seen.
It's. Not. Going. To. Be. A. Problem. At. All.

Enough is enough, Gemma. You guys don't win the right to destroy someone or attempt to destroy one because politics/campaigning/etc. Stop politicizing the courts. Stop. You become part of the problem.
This is my very first post on this topic. Enough is enough ? Stay on the topic . And ftr the topic is not me.
the Topic is how this SC nom is able to balance her religious beliefs with the law she will be expected to uphold.
Now, speak on the topic. TIA
This is not your very first post and all of your posts have a common theme. I'm assuming that you took the time to go through her rulings? She has them. You have evidence. Show me that she is not capable. And you are now a part of the problem. Not a part of the solution.
Again, the op is not about me.
Please stay on topic.
please feel free to share with the group her list of rulings.
thank you !
No it's up to you to show a list of Judge Barrett's rulings that would back up the allegations expressed in your OP.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,188
Reaction score
11,305
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Is this supposed to be a problem? Is that where we are headed with this? It's not going to have a role. Thanks for playing.
Idk. Do you believe it’s a problem?
However I do think it may have a role. Whether it’s a “problem” remains to be seen.
It's. Not. Going. To. Be. A. Problem. At. All.

Enough is enough, Gemma. You guys don't win the right to destroy someone or attempt to destroy one because politics/campaigning/etc. Stop politicizing the courts. Stop. You become part of the problem.
This is my very first post on this topic. Enough is enough ? Stay on the topic . And ftr the topic is not me.
the Topic is how this SC nom is able to balance her religious beliefs with the law she will be expected to uphold.
Now, speak on the topic. TIA
This is not your very first post and all of your posts have a common theme. I'm assuming that you took the time to go through her rulings? She has them. You have evidence. Show me that she is not capable. And you are now a part of the problem. Not a part of the solution.
Again, the op is not about me.
Please stay on topic.
please feel free to share with the group her list of rulings.
thank you !
Not how it works. You claim her belonging to this group is a problem, you have to show how it's affected her previous rulings.

If you can't or won't, then you can piss off.
 
OP
G

-Gemma-

Guest
-Gemma- You need to include your opinion when you start a thread. Simply posting a link and part of an article won't cut it.

Hello , Aye. I have only 1 account. Kindly share the rule in which a poster must share his/her opinion along with the OP. I must have overlooked it. TIA :)
 

Lucy Hamilton

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
38,422
Reaction score
15,122
Points
1,590
Is this supposed to be a problem? Is that where we are headed with this? It's not going to have a role. Thanks for playing.
Idk. Do you believe it’s a problem?
However I do think it may have a role. Whether it’s a “problem” remains to be seen.
It's. Not. Going. To. Be. A. Problem. At. All.

Enough is enough, Gemma. You guys don't win the right to destroy someone or attempt to destroy one because politics/campaigning/etc. Stop politicizing the courts. Stop. You become part of the problem.
This is my very first post on this topic. Enough is enough ? Stay on the topic . And ftr the topic is not me.
the Topic is how this SC nom is able to balance her religious beliefs with the law she will be expected to uphold.
Now, speak on the topic. TIA
This is not your very first post and all of your posts have a common theme. I'm assuming that you took the time to go through her rulings? She has them. You have evidence. Show me that she is not capable. And you are now a part of the problem. Not a part of the solution.
Again, the op is not about me.
Please stay on topic.
please feel free to share with the group her list of rulings.
thank you !
Everyone IS already On Topic in this thread.
LOL
No everyone IS already On Topic in this thread. Now you were going to post links to rulings that Judge Barrett had issued that could back up the allegations suggested about her in your OP. Okay so we all are waiting for those links you were going to post.
 

Lucy Hamilton

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
38,422
Reaction score
15,122
Points
1,590
-Gemma- You need to include your opinion when you start a thread. Simply posting a link and part of an article won't cut it.

Hello , Aye. I have only 1 account. Kindly share the rule in which a poster must share his/her opinion along with the OP. I must have overlooked it. TIA :)
"I have only 1 account."

What a strange comment, why do you feel the need to point this out?
Um, look above. The pp link to the rule that a member must have only 1 account.
If you used your other brain cell you would have figured that Aye means for you to click the link to read the forum rules where it says that you need to INCLUDE your OWN OPINION in an OP and NOT just post an OP with a link.

1601240675812.png


A simple click of Aye's link directly brings you to what she was meaning:

1601240755324.png
 

buttercup

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
4,957
Reaction score
2,919
Points
1,020
I don't see what the problem is. And I don't even agree with some of the replies by the Republicans here who are inadvertently agreeing with the OP by saying that her spiritual views have not influenced her rulings. So what if they have? As long as it is in line with the constitution and natural law... what is the problem? The other side is influenced by their spiritual views, or lack thereof. Everyone is. And that's OK, again, as long as it's not unconstitutional.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we follow the ideas of anti-christian leftists like Gemma to their logical conclusion, then eventually the only acceptable people to serve in government would be atheists. Might as well throw out our entire foundation, and become like North Korea or the former Soviet Union, if atheism is only position allowed.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,188
Reaction score
11,305
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
The nearly 50-year-old group, founded and based in South Bend, Indiana, exerts considerable sway over members, according to published reports, leading to questions about what role — if any — it would have if Coney Barrett ascends to a life-time post in the highest court in the land.

Part of the focus in discussions of People of Praise is the “lifelong promise of love and service to fellow community members, … a covenant commitment,” that members make “which establishes our relationships as members of the People of Praise community,” according to the website, which added “our covenant is neither an oath nor a vow, but it is an important personal commitment” among people who “support each other financially and materially and spiritually.”

Members of People of Praise, which could not be reached for comment Saturday, also are said to be accountable to a same-sex adviser, called a “head” for men and—until recently—a “handmaiden” for women, who gives input on a wide variety of personal decisions.

1.3 billion: That was the estimated number of Roman Catholics in the world in 2018, according to the National Catholic Reporter. There were 51 million Catholics in the United States in 2018, according to the Pew Research Center. People of Praise counts about 1,700 members in 22 cities across the U.S., Canada, and the Caribbean, according to its website

Here’s What To Know About People Of Praise, The Christian Group Amy Coney Barrett Belongs To
How about you posting these so called "published reports" and then I will consider this thread something other than just another Fake News Thread you Sheeple are bleating about.
You have the link. Get off your fat ass and look it up yourself. My name is not google
I'll bet you told your teachers they had to do your homework for you.

How'd that work out?
Weird Lucy said everyone is speaking on topic and here you are
And funnily enough -- you're not.

Find any decisions she made not based on law yet? Or have your masters not provided any yet?
 

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,873
Reaction score
9,918
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
The nearly 50-year-old group, founded and based in South Bend, Indiana, exerts considerable sway over members, according to published reports, leading to questions about what role — if any — it would have if Coney Barrett ascends to a life-time post in the highest court in the land.

Part of the focus in discussions of People of Praise is the “lifelong promise of love and service to fellow community members, … a covenant commitment,” that members make “which establishes our relationships as members of the People of Praise community,” according to the website, which added “our covenant is neither an oath nor a vow, but it is an important personal commitment” among people who “support each other financially and materially and spiritually.”

Members of People of Praise, which could not be reached for comment Saturday, also are said to be accountable to a same-sex adviser, called a “head” for men and—until recently—a “handmaiden” for women, who gives input on a wide variety of personal decisions.

1.3 billion: That was the estimated number of Roman Catholics in the world in 2018, according to the National Catholic Reporter. There were 51 million Catholics in the United States in 2018, according to the Pew Research Center. People of Praise counts about 1,700 members in 22 cities across the U.S., Canada, and the Caribbean, according to its website

Here’s What To Know About People Of Praise, The Christian Group Amy Coney Barrett Belongs To
Either link to an actual case she has influenced with her religious beliefs not the law or shut the hell up.
I’m not google
piss off
In other words you can not prove your claim so it is just you blowing smoke up every ones ass.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,188
Reaction score
11,305
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
I don't see what the problem is. And I don't even agree with some of the replies by the Republicans here who are inadvertently agreeing with the OP by saying that her spiritual views have not influenced her rulings. So what if they have? As long as it is in line with the constitution and natural law... what is the problem? The other side is influenced by their spiritual views, or lack thereof. Everyone is. And that's OK, again, as long as it's not unconstitutional.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we follow the ideas of anti-christian leftists like Gemma to their logical conclusion, then eventually the only acceptable people to serve in government would be atheists. Might as well throw out our entire foundation, and become like North Korea or the former Soviet Union, if atheism is only position allowed.
That is exactly the far left's goal.

Their little-g god, government, is a jealous god.
 

John T. Ford

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2020
Messages
3,602
Reaction score
4,626
Points
1,893
And funnily enough -- you're not.

Find any decisions she made not based on law yet? Or have your masters not provided any yet?
One cannot provide what does not exist.

But, that doesn't stop the Sheeple from parroting the Fake News.

Facts are not needed.

Only emotion ....
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,188
Reaction score
11,305
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
And funnily enough -- you're not.

Find any decisions she made not based on law yet? Or have your masters not provided any yet?
One cannot provide what does not exist.

But, that doesn't stop the Sheeple from parroting the Fake News.

Facts are not needed.

Only emotion ....
Facts are...inconvenient.

“There's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.”

-- Noted Leftist Thinker -- errr, sorry, Feeler -- AOC
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top