Dems on SCOTUS: Catholics Need Not Apply


Sen. Feinstein, speaking for the pro-abortion Democrats, wants to create the view that Barrett as a Catholic will decide an abortion case based on her Catholic religion. The Feinstein Democrats would never question the religion of anyone who supports abortion.

After first being questioned about her religious convictions—coming close to invoking a religious test—by Senator Dick Durbin and Senator Dianne Feinstein , Barrett’s religious affiliations are now under attack.
The New York Times has an interesting story on Barrett’s membership in a Catholic group called People of Praise. The paper calls it “a small, tightly knit Christian group,” one whose

And we were told the constitution prohibits a religious test for public office !


Catholics not allowed. Mentally disturbed transgender communists need only apply.


Whoa. What happened to separation of church and state??? Does it only apply to catholics???


Only baby killers need apply ! :roll_eyes:


The liberal judges will soon make more LAWS via the bench to advance their lunacy !!! :face_with_symbols_over_mouth:


Elections MATTER ……………


Freedom of religion applies to all citizens…including judges.

The Democrat Party would rather they were all atheists.


Well now that they mention it, A Jesuit on the SCOTUS wouldn’t be bad idea.


Nothing should prevent that from happening. Judges are supposed to be apolitical, suppress their religious beliefs and rule in accordance with CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

If a Jesuit can do that, I would welcome one to any court in the land.

IMHO, in regard to Roe v Wade, since abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution, any laws pertaining to it should be made by the states.

The federal law should be abolished by a SCOTUS decision that it is unconstitutional with the opinion including suggestion by the court that each state pass its own abortion law.


The president has not picked a SCOTUS yet and all the outrageous claims coming from the left about Roe v Wade , immigration and healthcare being gone . WTF ! :roll_eyes:


They called it fear mongering when people said anything about Obama or Clinton.

With the dems they call it their reality.


The sky is always falling with the left !!! :laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:



The newest development on the subject (and the linchpin to it all I believe) is the establishment of “Personhood”. When does a fetus become a person? Before you answer like you would have 2 years ago, read up on the medical journals on the subject. Personhood begin a lot earlier than many are comfortable with and this time the evidence can be presented in a factual way. Whatever point of fetal development the science determines it to be a person, it will automatically be protected by the constitution and every right and privilege it bears for the rest of his / her life.


They can start with the earliest premature birth of a child that survived outside of the womb.

Nobody can convince me that life begins at birth.

Babies born at 23 weeks may survive with these specialists in a state-of-the-art NICU, but the odds of survival are much lower. The earliest baby to have ever survived premature birth was born at 21 weeks and 6 days, and this was reported in the news as having been a “miracle.”.

Premature Birth, Viability, and Survival Statistics - Verywell

Youngest Premature Baby’s Survival Called a ‘Miracle’

LOS ANGELES — The world’s youngest surviving baby, born at 21 weeks and six days and weighing just 10 ounces, is due to be discharged from hospital this week after a battle for life described as miraculous.


When does money become speech or do corporations become people??


“corporate personhood” simply expresses the idea that the corporation has a legal identity separate from its shareholders. That separateness, the brief pointed out, is inherent in what it means to be a corporation. A “first principle” of corporate law (as we explained) is that “for-profit corporations are entities that possess legal interests and a legal identity of their own—one separate and distinct from their shareholders. ” .
An arts-and-crafts retailer, Hobby Lobby is a big company, with upwards of 20,000 employees and more than 600 stores. But it’s a “closely held” corporation—meaning its stock is not publicly traded. The stock is owned by members of one family, the Greens of Oklahoma City, who are devout Christians.


How did we go from a discussion on Abortion to CORPORATE PERSONHOOD ??? WTF?


I apologize but I cannot understand any of what you typed. As a matter of fact I feel a little dumber having read it.


I’m sorry, I looked at it and can’t see grammar or structural changes necessary.


Monte’s in the thread. The subject always changes when Monte’s in the thread.