row_33 Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 13 minutes ago, dpberr said: It amazes me that the fringe on both sides still gets anxious over Roe v. Wade in 2018. The Supreme Court isn't going to touch that case ever again, regardless of who is on it. They aren't in the business of overturning one of their own decisions. It'd be like rewriting a chapter of the Bible to "reflect modern viewpoints." it will definitely be overturned and sent back to the states and won't make a hill of beans of difference as it's already decided by each state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 1 hour ago, dpberr said: The Supreme Court isn't going to touch that case ever again, regardless of who is on it. They aren't in the business of overturning one of their own decisions. I have Lawrence v. Texas on line 1 for you. 1 hour ago, dpberr said: It'd be like rewriting a chapter of the Bible to "reflect modern viewpoints." And the Episcopalian Church holding on line 2. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 you think bablylonbee.com isn't satire?? with 2 more retirements from the liberal side of the bench before 2024 it is going to be overturned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 10 minutes ago, row_33 said: you think bablylonbee.com isn't satire? Satire that is far too close to reality on occasion. The Episcopalian Church no longer resembles the historic, orthodox faith. Hyperbole aside, that is my point, which I thought was easily recognized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 10 minutes ago, LeviF91 said: Satire that is far too close to reality on occasion. The Episcopalian Church no longer resembles the historic, orthodox faith. Hyperbole aside, that is my point, which I thought was easily recognized. what is the Episcopalian Church, it's not big in Canada or mainstream, I can imagine though.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 1 minute ago, row_33 said: what is the Episcopalian Church, it's not big in Canada or mainstream, I can imagine though.... The American portion of the Anglican Communion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 11 minutes ago, LeviF91 said: The American portion of the Anglican Communion. have they lost congregations that are fed up with them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 1 hour ago, dpberr said: It amazes me that the fringe on both sides still gets anxious over Roe v. Wade in 2018. The Supreme Court isn't going to touch that case ever again, regardless of who is on it. They aren't in the business of overturning one of their own decisions. It'd be like rewriting a chapter of the Bible to "reflect modern viewpoints." I used to agree that they would never touch Roe v. Wade again, but I'm reconsidering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 9 minutes ago, row_33 said: have they lost congregations that are fed up with them? There are several "Anglican" churches that have split off as they disagreed with the slide towards theological liberalism in the Anglican communion. The ACNA, for example, is made up of conservative former members of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 17 minutes ago, LeviF91 said: There are several "Anglican" churches that have split off as they disagreed with the slide towards theological liberalism in the Anglican communion. The ACNA, for example, is made up of conservative former members of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada. same as up here in our Anglican churches, property rights were the big concern but the orthodox said whatever and left anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 The silly season is upon us again FTA: Years ago, David Brock alleged that Brett Kavanaugh, now under consideration for the Supreme Court, saw Hillary Clinton on television during a party in 1997, and mouthed the word “B word.” I don’t know whether to believe Brock, but the word might not have been inconsistent with Kananaugh’s thinking — if not two decades ago then one decade, when Hillary tried mightily to keep him from being confirmed as a federal appellate judge. The word also might not be inconsistent with the thinking of a large number of Senators from both parties. I mention Brock’s allegation because it has been revived — a sure sign that the silly, albeit deadly serious, season of another judicial confirmation struggle is upon us. Off-hand comments a candidate may (or may not) have made at a party more than 20 years ago become fair game. Associates who were mentored by a candidate and who followed him from one job to another can allege, years after the fact, that the candidate engaged in sexual harassment. The allegation will enter, and very likely dominate, the debate over the nominee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 Kavanaugh would be the perfect reverse backhand finale to the Clinton Era he's good for the third replacement happening by 2021 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 3, 2018 Author Share Posted July 3, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/03/chuck-schumer-fail-62-of-americans-want-new-supreme-court-justice-before-midterms/ and the 62% want a Justice that makes Scalia seem like a pinko. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 BIGOT much? MSNBC analyst botches possible SCOTUS justice Amy Barrett’s name, sneers that she’s ‘VERY Catholic’ Can you imagine the fit the Left would throw if Obama had nominated a Muslim for the SCOTUS and some ‘analyst’ on Fox News said he or she was ‘very Muslim’? They’d be screeching about bigot this and Islamaphobia that … But since Amy Barrett is a possible Trump SCOTUS nominee that apparently makes her faith an ok thing to go after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 21 minutes ago, B-Man said: BIGOT much? MSNBC analyst botches possible SCOTUS justice Amy Barrett’s name, sneers that she’s ‘VERY Catholic’ Can you imagine the fit the Left would throw if Obama had nominated a Muslim for the SCOTUS and some ‘analyst’ on Fox News said he or she was ‘very Muslim’? They’d be screeching about bigot this and Islamaphobia that … But since Amy Barrett is a possible Trump SCOTUS nominee that apparently makes her faith an ok thing to go after. Religious litmus tests are all the rage, don't-cha-know. This just serves to demonstrate how far the left has moved beyond the years of JFK, who himself was attacked for his Catholic faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 6 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Religious litmus tests are all the rage, don't-cha-know. This just serves to demonstrate how far the left has moved beyond the years of JFK, who himself was attacked for his Catholic faith. Unless you're brown or a muslim. In which case, it's all red carpet, all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 43 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Religious litmus tests are all the rage, don't-cha-know. This just serves to demonstrate how far the left has moved beyond the years of JFK, who himself was attacked for his Catholic faith. JFK basically stated that his "faith" would have nothing to do with his governing that could go at least two ways: 1) that his "faith" really had zero bearing on his life and conscience, in all effects he was basically an atheist 2) his faith meant something personally and he could detach it from political decisions. the Dems have tried to torque this strategy into righteousness since then, it is drastically failing now in the face of modernism and atheism that is predominant in the party. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Obama ran into something like this when his Pastor was apparently giving extreme Anti-America sermons for the 20 years of "membership" The media looked the other way completely, they probably understood that he really didn't care a hoot what was going on, if he bothered to honestly attend in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, row_33 said: 1) that his "faith" really had zero bearing on his life and conscience, in all effects he was basically an atheist Based on his personal behavior, I would go with this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: See, this is the guy that has stated presidents cannot or should not face an legal prosecution or anything while in office. I see an idiot like you is pushing this. Got your marching orders. You are totally a paid poster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 7 minutes ago, Tiberius said: You are totally a paid poster 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 28 minutes ago, LeviF91 said: Based on his personal behavior, I would go with this one. On the balance of probabilities I would agree, but I'm not to judge and sincerely wish him otherwise.... The other issue is that quite often "the church" is used by the Dems to preach 100% political messages on a given Sunday. When a GOP-leaning political sermon is given, there is the threat of stripping the entity of charitable status. Just another roundabout double-standard.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 6 hours ago, B-Man said: The silly season is upon us again FTA: Years ago, David Brock alleged that Brett Kavanaugh, now under consideration for the Supreme Court, saw Hillary Clinton on television during a party in 1997, and mouthed the word “B word.” Let's be honest, over the last 25 years what man (and a large number of women) hasn't said that about Hillary Clinton 6 hours ago, B-Man said: I mention Brock’s allegation because it has been revived — a sure sign that the silly, albeit deadly serious, season of another judicial confirmation struggle is upon us. Off-hand comments a candidate may (or may not) have made at a party more than 20 years ago become fair game. So Barry, how about those college transcripts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 13 minutes ago, /dev/null said: So Barry, how about those college transcripts It's the college and financial aid applications that would be of great interest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 4, 2018 Share Posted July 4, 2018 3 hours ago, /dev/null said: Let's be honest, over the last 25 years what man (and a large number of women) hasn't said that about Hillary Clinton Hell, I thought she considered it a compliment by now. Like calling me a pedantic supercilious anal orifice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 4, 2018 Share Posted July 4, 2018 3 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Like calling me a pedantic supercilious anal orifice. What happens on Grindr stays on Grindr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 4, 2018 Share Posted July 4, 2018 (edited) The real meaning of Democrats’ Supreme Court panic by Ben Shapiro Original Article Democrats are in a state of sheer panic. They’re panicking because last week, Justice Anthony Kennedy — a reliable vote in favor of certain leftist priorities including abortion and same-sex marriage — announced that he will step down from the Supreme Court, leaving President Trump a second selection. This apparently will lead to the end of a free America. According to Jeffrey Toobinof CNN, the remade Supreme Court will spell doom: “Abortion illegal; doctors prosecuted; gay people barred from restaurants, hotels, stores; African-Americans out of elite schools; gun control banned in 50 states; the end of regulatory state.” None of this is true, of course. It simply demonstrates the wild overreach to which the left has subjected the judicial branch to date. The judicial branch was never meant to act as a superlegislature, using the verbiage of the Constitution in order to implement preferred policy prescriptions. In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton expressed the idea well: “The courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise WILL instead of JUDGMENT, the consequence would equally be the substitution of their pleasure to that of the legislative body.” Substituting will for judgment would make the case for utterly dissolving the judicial branch. Yet according to the Democrats, the Supreme Court should exercise will instead of judgment. The role of the court, according to Justice Sonia Sotomayor, is to help expedite change in our society: “Our society would be strait-jacketed were not the courts, with the able assistance of the lawyers, constantly overhauling the law and adapting it to the realities of ever-changing social, industrial and political conditions.” Justice Elena Kagan believes the same thing, which is why she constantly describes the Constitution as “abstract,” leaving her room to interpret it as poetry rather than statute. This is why Democrats celebrate obviously superlegal decisions like Roe v. Wade: There is no right to abortion in the Constitution, but they would prefer not to battle that issue out at the electoral level. The Supreme Court allows them to hand down their policy from the mountaintop without having to subject those policies to public scrutiny. And that means that any reversal of such policy by a Supreme Court that actually reads the Constitution as it was written is a threat to Democratic hegemony. Were Trump to appoint an originalist to the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade would surely die, but that wouldn’t make abortion illegal — the issue would have to be put before the American public. Affirmative action from state schools would end, but African-Americans wouldn’t be barred from attending elite institutions — such a bar would remain illegal. Gays across the country would not suddenly find themselves barred from public restaurants — it’s unlikely the Supreme Court would rule such action legal, and even if it were to do so, virtually no establishments across the country would start asking about sexual orientation at the door. In the end, the Democrats’ obsession with the Supreme Court says more about them than about the role of the court. It says that they don’t believe their policies are popular enough to win the country over at the electoral level. If the judiciary should be returned to its role of ruling by judgment rather than will, the will of the people might be heard once again — and it wouldn’t be friendly to Democrats. Democrats know it. Hence the panic. . Edited July 4, 2018 by B-Man 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 4, 2018 Share Posted July 4, 2018 yes yes of course, judge merely interpret the law, and the original intent of the role of the Court should always be followed... are we on Candid Camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts