dUSt Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 Unlike Obama's "Catholic" pick of Sonia Sotomayor, it looks like Brett Kavanaugh is actually a practicing Catholic as opposed to "raised Catholic". Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little2add Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 (edited) Why is it if a SC nominee in anyway leans towards prolife he is automatically disqualified but if he is a pro-abortion, this SC nominee he is exalted as a champion of woman’s rights. The Supreme Court “repeals” nothing, merely judges the constitutionality of laws, doesn’t make nor repeal them. IE: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. Sen. Chuck Schumer vows to oppose Brett Kavanaugh with "everything I've got" Schumer is revealing his ignorance (or contempt for) the US Constitution. Edited July 11, 2018 by little2add Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabrielofsorrows Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 I agree with you little2add. Its unbelievable that if kavanaugh was pro- choice he would be applauded by the Democratic party and also some of the moderate conservatives. Now, once again they cant handle to see a good catholic with conservatives views as being chosen. This all points to the moral decline that in the bible says... I stand for christ and his ways. God loves us all. I cant argue with that as we are all sinners and in need of the savior to save our souls. I will say this too which is heartbreaking, the liberals think there is nothing wrong with pro-choice or gay marriage, or becoming transgender. They are in for a rude awakening for jesus is against all that i have mentioned. We are living in a world that has become more and more ungodly. I pray for god to help my " unbelief every day... Meaning lord let my heart and mind understand that serving and loving you at all costs is a reason i will get mocked and rejected... But let it all be worth it for your glory. Its become a minority if you speak about jesus and the teachings of the catholic church. People dont want to hear it because we all are guilty of sin and need of gods forgiveness. But they dont want to hear about the truth. Some dont care. They want to live their lives without God and dont care about eternal consequences, thats what scares me. We arent made to save the world. Jesus has done that already. What alarms me, which shouldn't is people think they can live without christ and get by. This is the day and age of the reality we live in. We all have a choice, we love christ here and try to be a good, moral person ( no one is perfect) or choose evil and when the day comes that we draw our last breath, we will ultimately come face to face with jesus who will either accept us or reject us and say... I never knew you. Now, those are words i dont want to hear. I choose the narrow path ( which is difficult) but it will lead me to heaven some day. ☺ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 I'm pleased with the pick. I know the left will fight this tooth an nail, though. My concern is how much they will try to delay the process. He's never really said much about whether or not he would actually vote to overturn Roe, but I appreciate that he is favorable on matters of religious freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 I think it is a mistake to hope that Roe v Wade is overturned. It is a good principle to protect the privacy of a woman, and give her priority control over her body. The effect of that good principle is that the fetus is not recognized as a person in clear definition. Hence weak protection for them when balancing the rights of the mother. The fight should not be to repeal RvW, but establish legal rights for the unborn. Those rights may eliminate late term abortion, and potentially any cases that the life of the mother is not endangered. Right to lifers also need to support better adoption and foster care programs and child protection services that are so underfunded and antiquated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 1 hour ago, Anomaly said: I think it is a mistake to hope that Roe v Wade is overturned. It is a good principle to protect the privacy of a woman, and give her priority control over her body. The effect of that good principle is that the fetus is not recognized as a person in clear definition. Hence weak protection for them when balancing the rights of the mother. The fight should not be to repeal RvW, but establish legal rights for the unborn. Those rights may eliminate late term abortion, and potentially any cases that the life of the mother is not endangered. Right to lifers also need to support better adoption and foster care programs and child protection services that are so underfunded and antiquated. There can be no meaningful legal rights for the unborn as long as Roe stands. The decision assumes that the mother’s privacy right outweighs whatever rights the unborn child may have. Now, if you are talking about a constitutional amendment, I am all for trying that, but getting Roe reversed is more realistic right now and will save lives right now while we attempt to establish a constitutional right to life for unborn children. 15 hours ago, dUSt said: Unlike Obama's "Catholic" pick of Sonia Sotomayor, it looks like Brett Kavanaugh is actually a practicing Catholic as opposed to "raised Catholic". Thoughts? I am worried that he will be another Kennedy but we shall see. I don’t think we will know because he is unlikely to give his true opinion during the nomination process. He seems to be a bit of a career politician, which worries me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linate Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 he said he'd stick with Roe, but i think he may have been only saying that in his capacity as a circuit judge, as his confirmation hearing for that illustrates.... "SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-N.Y.), with then aide Preet Bharara sitting behind him: “Do you consider Roe v. Wade to be an abomination and do you consider yourself to be a judicial nominee … in the mold of Scalia and Thomas?” KAVANAUGH: “Senator, on the question of Roe v. Wade, if confirmed to the D.C. Circuit, I would follow Roe v. Wade faithfully and fully. That would be binding precedent of the court. It’s been decided by the Supreme Court. … I’m saying if I were confirmed to the D.C. Circuit, senator, I would follow it. It’s been reaffirmed many times.” SCHUMER: “I understand, but what is your opinion? You’re not on the bench yet. You’ve talked about these issues in the past to other people, I’m sure.” KAVANAUGH: “The Supreme Court has held repeatedly, senator, and I don’t think it would be appropriate for me to give a personal view on that case.” The one-minute cliphttps://cs.pn/2MXPt5a " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little2add Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 7 hours ago, Anomaly said: The fight should not be to repeal RvW, but establish legal rights for the unborn. Like slavery, segregation and child labor, the practice of abortion has crept under the tent of the law due to social, economic and political pressures, not on its own merits. A legal victory over abortion will not be achieved by one or two cases, but only by the persistent recourse to the courts, as abortion practices are challenged with new data which demonstrate the violation of constitutional rights. What will gradually emerge as these cases are adjudicated are the facts and the principles of a new juridic development, embryonic law. The constitutional issue in the abortion question, the termination of unborn life, was not faced by the Court, in fact, the Court refused to consider that issue, much as the Dred Scott Decision refused to face the question of the manner in which Black Africans were brought to the United States or the inhuman manner of their servitude. This was because Roe v. Wadewas presented, on the basis of the briefs, as a case of law facilitating a basic constitutional right, rather than constituting one. Those arguing the case made sure that the question of unborn life and the manner of its destruction would never be faced by the Court. This is exactly the same way that Dred Scott, Plessy v. Ferguson and Lochner v. New York were decided...all of which were later overturned by the Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little2add Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 (edited) @Peace @linate And we’re all back to the valid point that Right to Life is more than the RvW law, and simply legal abortion. We (society) didn’t get here on a whim and quick decision that will quickly changed. No complete solution is going to come out of just a SC Justice. Because I’m an avowed atheist, I don’t think a prayer and a vote is going to change hearts and minds. I also don’t think the Catholic Church believes so either. Edited July 13, 2018 by Anomaly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little2add Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 3 hours ago, Anomaly said: also don’t think the Catholic Church believes so either Have a little faith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little2add Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 also i do think the Catholic Church believes prayer and a vote is going to change hearts and minds (and will), but defiantly not the minds of the Democratic Party Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 14, 2018 Share Posted July 14, 2018 Indeed, the Catholic Church does believe - "Ask and you shall receive, knock and the door will open"...... ...........but we also hear that petitionary prayer as it were must be the prayer full of Faith. It is because the people generally had no Faith in Jesus, despite all He had already done, that His Hands are tied as it were. Do I really believe trustfully and confidently in the words of Scripture? "So he was not able to perform any mighty deed there, apart from curing a few sick people by laying his hands on them. He was amazed at their lack of faith." (Mark Ch6) "Jesus replied, “What is impossible with man is possible with God.” (Luke Ch18) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted July 14, 2018 Share Posted July 14, 2018 Silly people. I don’t think it’s a rationale or reasonable expression of your faith to sit back and prayer for a miracle after you cast your vote. You gotta get out of the church and off your knees. Somebody has to volunteer as a guardian ad litem. Somebody has to pay attention and attend the county board meeting when they discuss budgets for roads, teacher salaries, and child services. Somebody has to ask questions and ponder if a policy will promote jobs or is only a boon to profits, or maybe a comprise on both. In the land of milk and honey, somebody still has to shovel cow poop and get the combs from angry bees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little2add Posted July 15, 2018 Share Posted July 15, 2018 There is more than one way to pray Than kneeing in church. BTW: sitting back is not one of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now