HOT MIC: Liberal Senator Feinstein Caught Ranting About Amy Coney Barrett’s Catholic Religion When S

- for starters (& the most glaring)...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommyb...oking-harsh-response-from-trump/#68d883f92051

 

There are more Catholics already on the Supreme Court than any other religion. But it is 100% OK for Dirty Donald and the right wing to curtail travel from Muslims countries to our country???

 

Might you NOT be conflating x 2 separate issues...? Lets try to not get into a one track logistical track / rut here. Before I go on further do you have any redeeming assertions you would like to make on the utter 'redonkulousness' of your assertion?

 

Sotomayor is a Catholic. She was nominated and approved by Democrats.
Breyer is Christian and married to a Christian clergy member. Nominated by Clinton.

You know nothing, Jon Snow.

 

Are you serious?

 

Prochoice.. baby killing is opposite what Catholics beleive.. seems some bishop says he wouldn't give Biden communion.

 

Democrats will not discriminate based on religion as long as someone is zealously pro-abortion.

 

That's a conventional, secular view point... duly noted.

 

Haven't ever met a "pro" abortion person. That would be a person who ALWAYS recommends abortion, so it makes your assertion pretty silly-assed.

 

Oh please. Your own article shows the ridiculousness of Trump's claims:
Tuesday morning, President Trump tweeted that "Biden just took a more Liberal position on Roe v. Wade than Elizabeth Warren at her highest," and then falsely accused Biden of being "in favor" of late-term abortions "right up until the time of birth, and beyond."
Biden has not publicly espoused a position explicitly supporting late-term abortions and has previously declared he supported a ban on partial-birth abortions or late-term abortions.

I think you'll find that most Catholics' thinking has evolved beyond blind faith and following and include pro choice views. Hell - Trump himself was pro choice until it was more expedient for him to be pro life.

 

So should we go down this 'slippery slope' of condoning something... vs. overtly advocating for it... "Cummon Man" - do we want to open the floor to discussion on this or shut it down in BS exchanges... ? your call

 

It also happens to be conventionally true, but I can understand how someone who considers themselves a Christian might want to resist being caught under that banner. Nor does that assessment mean that every Christian is the way I described, but that is the truth in an overall sense.

The idea that you cannot be a "true" Christian based on political ideology would probably disqualify as many on the right as you think it does on the left. For example, if you support Trump's border monument, it has to be real hard to

"...love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

while advocating for the building of a giant wall to keep out the most destitute and at risk of them.

 

NO slippery slope. One can be "pro-choice" or anti choice. I've met very few people who are actually pro-life or pro-abortion. Most "pro-lifers" tend to abandon that position after the child is born and become more "ambivalent" life if it interferes with profits.

 

I maintain, on the authority of Scripture, (& not my own personally held values - necessarily) that All life is sacred & ending it - overtly w/o the dire medical need to do so (by the mother) is a sin. Yes I said the "S" word... looking forward the Sheite storm to follow, lol...

 

I can only assume that you run in some rather 'jaded' & jaundiced circles... WOW

 

From your link.

“She’s been pro-life for a long time. So I suspect with her, it is deeply personal and comes with her religion.”

If you didn't get this already, I don't really buy into the whole sensitivity thing, so the issue here is not readily apparent to me. As such, I defer to your expertise. Can you please clue me in on how specifically that statement offended you?

Is being pro life offensive?
Is a deeply held belief in pro life offensive?
Is claiming that her religion is pro life offensive?
Do I even have the right quote?

Thank you for any clarification you can provide.

 

Read the federalist papers AN. The founders were very much against Religion having a place in our governance, and that our governance should not control religion.

Morality and religion are 2 separate things. The framers believed in "the morality of man", and that much of that morality was inherent in the individual, but also that it was derived from experience. Religion is from "teachings", and can effect morality if believed strongly enough. They were very clear in their discussions that Religion had no place in our governance, but that morality did.

When we're talking about SC justices, that becomes a much bigger issue.Are the decisions the judge makes based on morality, or their religion ? THAT is why we need to make sure that a SC justice uses their moral judgements, not ones taught thru religion.

Again, with all due respect. If we had a muslim woman nominated the right would loose their ever lovin minds. So again, it it morality or religion

 

My religion is fine with abortion. Please don't tread on my religious rights.

 

Lol righties want her gone, not realizing her replacement will be twice as liberal

 

Really ? You left out that the founders also said that "Religion has no place in governance". Nobody is debating her religion, nor are the denying her that. They are asking if she will "govern from religious beliefs, or from the law". THAT is what is being debated. Nobody is testing her religion, they are asking if she will use it in her governance.

That is from Deism

 

Killing babies is illigal.

 

How about "textualism" as a concept... perhaps the notion of 'Originalism' should enter into the conversation as we go down these merry paths of religiosity & moral convictions... hmmmm?

 

Yes, it’s called humanity.

 

The old ' a fetus is not a child" argument.

 

"Killing babies". The old elicit emotional response instead of fact arguement.