1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Amy Coney Barrett 'to be picked by Trump for Supreme Court'. Interesting lady - a mother of seven...

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Wanda_the_Wonder, Sep 26, 2020.

  1. Wanda_the_Wonder

    Wanda_the_Wonder Established commenter

    DrLinus likes this.
  2. harsh-but-fair

    harsh-but-fair Star commenter

    How long before she is nominated for Sainthood, do you reckon, Gene?
     
    monicabilongame likes this.
  3. Aquamarina1234

    Aquamarina1234 Star commenter

    If she kisses Trump's ass, nothing else about her matters.
    I bet he wouldnt countenance a devout Muslim.
     
  4. Wanda_the_Wonder

    Wanda_the_Wonder Established commenter

    That's not at all fair on her. She seems to me a very independent-minded lady.
     
  5. Aquamarina1234

    Aquamarina1234 Star commenter

    Devout Catholics are well-known for independent thinking. No, wait...
     
  6. nervousned

    nervousned Lead commenter

    Except that she belongs to a religious group that believes that wives should do what their husbands decide.
     
  7. Wanda_the_Wonder

    Wanda_the_Wonder Established commenter

    ???? Not so!
     
  8. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    Is her religious belief incompatible with the impartiality required to be a judge?
     
  9. Wanda_the_Wonder

    Wanda_the_Wonder Established commenter

    Obviously not. If that were so there would be no Catholic judges anywhere.
     
  10. blazer

    blazer Star commenter

  11. Wanda_the_Wonder

    Wanda_the_Wonder Established commenter

  12. christubbs

    christubbs Occasional commenter

    Blessed be the fruit!
     
  13. BillyBobJoe

    BillyBobJoe Lead commenter

    There is a question mark over the balance of the court when so many on it are already conservative Roman Catholics. It points to a lack of diversity of world view which cannot be good for the deliberations of such an influential body.
     
  14. Katzenjammer

    Katzenjammer Senior commenter

    Trump is obviously desperate enough to suck up to the religious right, msking his second term a yet more dreadful prospect.

    "Barrett’s elevation to this position has been a long time coming. Her nomination has been made with one issue in mind: abortion. The conservative men who have been attacking a woman’s right to choose for a generation have long pined for a woman to do the final work of denying women their right to their own bodies. They’ve said so: Ramesh Ponnuru, longtime editor at National Review and fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, has written: “The main reason I favor Barrett, though, is the obvious one: She’s a woman…. If Roe v. Wade is ever overturned—as I certainly hope it will be, as it is an unjust decision with no plausible basis in the Constitution—it would be better if it were not done by only male justices, with every female justice in dissent.

    Barrett will not disappoint conservatives when it comes to abortion. While other jurists hoping to sit on the Supreme Court have at least attempted to be coy with their opposition to Roe v. Wade, Barrett has not. She has said that abortion is “always immoral.” She has said that Roe creates a framework of “abortion on demand” (a patently false claim given that Roe explicitly created a fetal viability standard after which the state was allowed to limit women’s fundamental rights). Barrett has put herself on the record against abortion rights generally, and Roe specifically, more than any person I can think of nominated for the Supreme Court after that 1973 decision. Over the next few weeks, Barrett and her moderate Republican defenders will likely try to tell people that she’s been lying all this time. They’ll try to tell us that she hasn’t already made up her mind about abortion, that she respects 50 years of Supreme Court precedent, that she’s not being elevated to the Supreme Court just because she’s a woman who happens to hate a woman’s right to choose."

    Source: Elie Mystal; [incidentally herself a Catholic] The Nation.
     
  15. dumpty

    dumpty Star commenter

    At least the Americans don't even pretend to have fully impartial judges on this court - Biden would do exactly the same and try to get a liberal seated. Obama reportedly tried to get Ginsburg` to step down before she died so he could get a young liberal in her place - and seated for decades.

    He might have left it late but maybe Trump now is learning how to be political. Choosing a very religious candidate makes it a tad tougher for the Demcrats to go hard on her as they know religion is big in the US.

    All a farce but my type of corruption - honest :p
     
    Kandahar likes this.
  16. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    She said that she would recuse if it is. A pity the DUP don't follow the same principle on matters of conscience or Caleb Foundation aims.
     
    SeanbheanMac likes this.
  17. NoseyMatronType

    NoseyMatronType Star commenter

    Carol Sanger’s superb study About Abortion: Terminating Pregnancy in 21st Century America provides some historical context for this appointment:

    ‘In 2005, former Pope Benedict XVI, when still Bishop Ratzinger in his position as Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, declared that “a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion” were he or she to vote for a candidate because of the candidate’s permissive stance on abortion.

    Thus, during the 2004 presidential campaign, the Roman Catholic bishop of Boston urged priests to deny Holy Communion to Senator John Kerry, and the bishop of Colorado extended the ban to Catholics who vote for candidates who support legal abortion. This was a powerful shot across the bow as candidates and voters alike learned that they might place themselves “outside of full communion with the church and so jeopardize their salvation.”

    During the 2012 presidential campaign, Vice President Joe Biden received a similar warning. In 2016, vice presidential candidate Tim Kaine was not denied communion, despite the urgings of Richmond
    area priests, though he was accused by the Archbishop of Kansas of being a “cafeteria Catholic” who picks and chooses among the Church’s teachings for political convenience.’
     
    Scintillant likes this.
  18. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    Presumably the catholics have nothing to do with any American politicians on that basis, and have made denunciations of the orange sexpest daily...

    #catholicblock
     
  19. Katzenjammer

    Katzenjammer Senior commenter

    Ridiculous. If parish priests denied communion to every Catholic who practised artificial contraception [still an anathema] the churches would empty overnight.
     
  20. hhhh

    hhhh Star commenter

    Couldn't this be argued to be the case for people from any faith body? Yet surely we wouldn't want to ban Muslims, for example?
    Some might even argues that atheists could be problematic, as they might see anyone who is religious as 'cultish', or 'answering to a higher power'.
    So could we only have agnostics?
     

Share This Page