• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are Democrats Attacking Amy Coney Barrett’s Religion And Family?

Bullseye said:
Yeah, you rule out practic

Of course she did. She eliminated about 99% of left wing slobber-slinging and then asks were the Dems are bad mouthing ACB.
Click to expand...

So she can now say that it's not happening at all because the ones doing it don't "count". LOL!
 
Bullseye said:
Yeah, you rule out practic

Of course she did. She eliminated about 99% of left wing slobber-slinging and then asks were the Dems are bad mouthing ACB.
Click to expand...

...and 100% of your disingenuous sources. Whoops.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
...and 100% of your disingenuous sources. Whoops.
Click to expand...
Disingenuous? This entire thread is disingenuous. "Tell me who's attacking ACB's family or religion but don't use any one who actually IS". It's like the forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "na, na, na . . . ".
 
Aunt Antifa said:
We can play “No, it does. “Yes it does” but the law is with me. Your opinion is with you. Law don’t care about your opinion. That makes two of us.
Click to expand...
You are taking a specific point and trying to make it universal. The law is not with you, nor is history.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg OPENED every single door that Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Sandra Day O'Connor have walked through, even BEFORE she became a Justice.
Amy Coney Barrett plans nothing less than SLAMMING that door shut again, forever.

Margaret Atwood says that she based "The Handmaid's Tale" directly ON groups like People of Praise, specifically BECAUSE of their extremist views on women.

Amy Coney Barrett deserves to be attacked full measure.
She is nothing less than a lead wrecking ball for women's rights.
She is, in fact, more than that because groups like People of Praise ARE NOT strictly "religious", they are in point of fact a heavily political arm of an extremist movement known as "Dominionism" that elevates pure theocracy as its central goal.
Click to expand...
Holy shit.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg OPENED every single door that Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Sandra Day O'Connor have walked through, even BEFORE she became a Justice.
Amy Coney Barrett plans nothing less than SLAMMING that door shut again, forever.

Margaret Atwood says that she based "The Handmaid's Tale" directly ON groups like People of Praise, specifically BECAUSE of their extremist views on women.

Amy Coney Barrett deserves to be attacked full measure.
She is nothing less than a lead wrecking ball for women's rights.
She is, in fact, more than that because groups like People of Praise ARE NOT strictly "religious", they are in point of fact a heavily political arm of an extremist movement known as "Dominionism" that elevates pure theocracy as its central goal.
Click to expand...

I have never heard of People of Praise. Can you cite your source on this? And are there any decisions she has made as a judge to corroborate her supposed goal of a theocracy?

I guess the first thing that doesn't make sense is if she's part of this group that treats women as below men and teaches that women should be in the backseat and never take leadership roles, that doesn't seem to jibe with her background of going to law school, being a professor, judge and perhaps justice of the highest court in the land. Why isn't she just a housewife and stay-at-home mother, then?
 
Bullseye said:
Disingenuous? This entire thread is disingenuous. "Tell me who's attacking ACB's family or religion but don't use any one who actually IS". It's like the forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "na, na, na . . . ".
Click to expand...

Feel free to use whatever bullshit standard you want. You can’t meet mine and you know it. Cause no dem has taken this troll bait. And that’s all it is.

You feel feee to use aaaaannnny ol quite you want. Won’t change a damn thing.
 
Josie said:
I have never heard of People of Praise. Can you cite your source on this? And are there any decisions she has made as a judge to corroborate her supposed goal of a theocracy?

I guess the first thing that doesn't make sense is if she's part of this group that treats women as below men and teaches that women should be in the backseat and never take leadership roles, that doesn't seem to jibe with her background of going to law school, being a professor, judge and perhaps justice of the highest court in the land. Why isn't she just a housewife and stay-at-home mother, then?
Click to expand...

Glad you are noticing the incongruity.
Then again, not the least bit surprised that are intentionally ignoring the cognitive dissonance.
I already cited my source, the author of the book The Handmaid's Tale.
People of Praise and a couple of other similar Dominionist groups were her inspiration to write the story.

By all means, keep singing chorus after chorus of "It Can't Happen Here" but I am aware of the fact that you're actually OKAY with ALL of it happening here, based on your confirmed views.
You should be thrilled.
 
Bullseye said:
Disingenuous? This entire thread is disingenuous. "Tell me who's attacking ACB's family or religion but don't use any one who actually IS". It's like the forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "na, na, na . . . ".
Click to expand...

I am attacking every square inch of everything concerning ACB and admit it openly.
This batsh*t crazy bitch can't be allowed to turn SCOTUS into her personal bully pulpit for theocracy.
I will support any means of removing her from confirmation.
Dominionists openly state that they are hostile to democracy, and openly state that their mission is to implement biblical law.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Glad you are noticing the incongruity.
Then again, not the least bit surprised that are intentionally ignoring the cognitive dissonance.
I already cited my source, the author of the book The Handmaid's Tale.
People of Praise and a couple of other similar Dominionist groups were her inspiration to write the story.
Click to expand...

Your source is a fictional piece of work? I mean......really? LOL!

By all means, keep singing chorus after chorus of "It Can't Happen Here" but I am aware of the fact that you're actually OKAY with ALL of it happening here, based on your confirmed views.
You should be thrilled.
Click to expand...

Remember the last time you made some ridiculous, incredibly rude and positively untrue statement about me? You ran away like a little skeered puppy after I called you out on it. Time for that again --- I'm "okay" with this country turning into a theocracy? .... and this is based on my "confirmed views"? Oh, do quote that, please.
 
Last edited:
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg OPENED every single door that Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Sandra Day O'Connor have walked through, even BEFORE she became a Justice.
Amy Coney Barrett plans nothing less than SLAMMING that door shut again, forever.

Margaret Atwood says that she based "The Handmaid's Tale" directly ON groups like People of Praise, specifically BECAUSE of their extremist views on women.

Amy Coney Barrett deserves to be attacked full measure.
She is nothing less than a lead wrecking ball for women's rights.
She is, in fact, more than that because groups like People of Praise ARE NOT strictly "religious", they are in point of fact a heavily political arm of an extremist movement known as "Dominionism" that elevates pure theocracy as its central goal.
Click to expand...

Goodness....please pray for forgiveness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PoS
Checkerboard Strangler said:
I am attacking every square inch of everything concerning ACB and admit it openly.
This batsh*t crazy bitch can't be allowed to turn SCOTUS into her personal bully pulpit for theocracy.
I will support any means of removing her from confirmation.
Dominionists openly state that they are hostile to democracy, and openly state that their mission is to implement biblical law.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you need to breathe into a paper bag for a while. Where the hell do you come up with this shit? Theocracy? Dominionists? Dude!
 
Bullseye said:
Sounds like you need to breathe into a paper bag for a while. Where the hell do you come up with this shit? Theocracy? Dominionists? Dude!
Click to expand...

He won't respond with anything other than "ZOMG!!!!!! HaNdMaId'S TaLe!!!11111"
 
  • Like
Reactions: PoS
Mashmont said:
I imagine Amy follows her church beliefs and opposes contraception, judging from the size of her family.
Click to expand...

Which to me is a big so what, as those are personal choices. It's when a USSC Justice would vote against upholding Roe v. Wade, due to her religious beliefs about abortion or contraception, that it's a huge problem for me.
 
Josie said:
He won't respond with anything other than "ZOMG!!!!!! HaNdMaId'S TaLe!!!11111"
Click to expand...
Libruls apparently think The Handmaid's Tale is a true story. :poop:
 
Josie said:
Your source is a fictional piece of work? I mean......really? LOL!



Remember the last time you made some ridiculous, incredibly rude and positively untrue statement about me? You ran away like a little skeered puppy after I called you out on it. Time for that again --- I'm "okay" with this country turning into a theocracy? .... and this is based on my "confirmed views"? Oh, do quote that, please.
Click to expand...

He should just quote *anyone* who has ever said anything similar that you have agreed with in the past.
 
BlueTex said:
She follows the beliefs of the church and does not use birth control...
Click to expand...

Right, got it. But would she vote to uphold Roe v. Wade or Griswold v. Connecticut if future cases come up that test either decision? I'm not sure she would do that, so that's a concern for me.
 
OceanBlues1 said:
Right, got it. But would she vote to uphold Roe v. Wade or Griswold v. Connecticut if future cases come up that test either decision? I'm not sure she would do that, so that's a concern for me.
Click to expand...

It’s definitely something to be concerned about.. in the past she has express skepticism about Roe being overturned.
 
smallvoice said:
If they aren’t, it’s because the hearings haven’t started. I’ll give the first liberal one question before the attack starts.
Click to expand...

Expressing concern about a Justice who would allow her religious beliefs to influence the way she votes on a case isn't an "attack."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom