• 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!

The Only Worry about Foxy Amy Coney Barrett is She's Too Good to Be True.

Only qualification needed for libs is diversity. The more far out the better.
Well....that's one opinion, I guess. :rolleyes:

Kinda hard to defend the logic, however, when one considers that the wingnuts are poised to nominate the most "far out" wingnuts in recent memory (i.e. Amy Coney Barrett) to the bench, any day now.

Obviously, there is no diversity among the wingnuts. About 90% of the party is white, male, evangelical (or right-wing Catholic) and rural/suburban. Coney Barrett represents "radical" diversity for you people, simple because she has ovaries.
 
Well....that's one opinion, I guess. :rolleyes:

Kinda hard to defend the logic, however, when one considers that the wingnuts are poised to nominate the most "far out" wingnuts in recent memory (i.e. Amy Coney Barrett) to the bench, any day now.

Obviously, there is no diversity among the wingnuts. About 90% of the party is white, male, evangelical (or right-wing Catholic) and rural/suburban. Coney Barrett represents "radical" diversity for you people, simple because she has ovaries.
Diversity is such nonsense. Whatever happened to competence, qualifications, and common sense?
 
Well....that's one opinion, I guess. :rolleyes:

Kinda hard to defend the logic, however, when one considers that the wingnuts are poised to nominate the most "far out" wingnuts in recent memory (i.e. Amy Coney Barrett) to the bench, any day now.

Obviously, there is no diversity among the wingnuts. About 90% of the party is white, male, evangelical (or right-wing Catholic) and rural/suburban. Coney Barrett represents "radical" diversity for you people, simple because she has ovaries.

Amy Coney Barrett is not far right. She would’ve been center left 40 years ago
 
Diversity is such nonsense. Whatever happened to competence, qualifications, and common sense?

Not only that they don’t care about diversity. If a Vietnamese or Cuban Republican we’re nominated then they would be equally vilified. Joy Reid yesterday called Kentucky’s black Attorney General “skin folk not kin folk” for properly applying the law.

The left doesn’t value diversity, the value having visible pets to put in front of cameras and spout political philosophy from secular white guys.

When blacks and Latinos voted against the alphabet people in CA the democrats completely disregarded them
 
First off, the civilizing of the Native Americans was a moral good. It was not genocide and it was not slaughter and to claim that is pure historical ignorance on your part.

Secondly your claim that the north was not very religious prior to the Civil War, is absolutely false. In fact the north east was the Home to all the most aggressive and puritanical forms of Protestant Christianity.

Also, it was not religious Christians in the English colonies that held slaves, the slavery in North America was predominantly driven by educated Men following Enlightenment principles. For lack of a better term, actually it is a perfect term, they were the liberals of their era who owns slaves.

Slavery has practiced in Catholic colonies in the Americas, was far more restrictive to the slaveowners, slaves had many more ways to be free, and The church never condoned to the practice.


You mean the mainstream political and moral views in effect when America became a power will destroy it? Lol
Do you know what the manifest destiny is? Americans thought they were doing gods work by expanding and killing the natives. The south used the bible to justify slavery.
 
Diversity is such nonsense. Whatever happened to competence, qualifications, and common sense?

The Republicans elected Donald Trump.
 
Do you know what the manifest destiny is? Americans thought they were doing gods work by expanding and killing the natives. The south used the bible to justify slavery.

We civilized them by raping and slaughtering them. This is much the same way white people think ”policing” is supposed to look to this day.
 
She has mixed race children so of course most white Democrats will rant she is unfit for public office. The racism against her by the Democratic Party for her children is going to be so rabid that it will even be embarrassing to Democratic Party KKK chapters for the level of pure racist hatred.
Democrats nominated, ran and elected a mixed-race President, now you want them to be racist against mixed race people? Didn't think that one through, did you.
 
First off, the civilizing of the Native Americans was a moral good. It was not genocide and it was not slaughter and to claim that is pure historical ignorance on your part.

Secondly your claim that the north was not very religious prior to the Civil War, is absolutely false. In fact the north east was the Home to all the most aggressive and puritanical forms of Protestant Christianity.

Also, it was not religious Christians in the English colonies that held slaves, the slavery in North America was predominantly driven by educated Men following Enlightenment principles. For lack of a better term, actually it is a perfect term, they were the liberals of their era who owns slaves.

Slavery has practiced in Catholic colonies in the Americas, was far more restrictive to the slaveowners, slaves had many more ways to be free, and The church never condoned to the practice.


You mean the mainstream political and moral views in effect when America became a power will destroy it? Lol
 
I know, right? Just like they think DeBlasio is bad for having mixed race children.

Why do you derp the stupid constantly?
Mind-boggling, innit? Remember how the right wing all blew a gasket when the Democrats ran and elected a mixed-race President?
 
Do you know what the manifest destiny is? Americans thought they were doing gods work by expanding and killing the natives. The south used the bible to justify slavery.

No, manifest destiny did not include wiping out the natives

There was never any policy promulgated by the US to wipe out any native Americans. Some Indians were savage evil bands of people who wouldn’t act in a civilized manner (such as the Comanche) and they had to be quelled with force. You ever wonder why Mexican villages in the North had walls? So villagers weren’t carried away by Comanches. Some Mexicans in the North welcomed the US Army in the Mexican American war because the soldiers liberated them from commanche terror Some tribes signed treaties to relocate and then attempted to renege (the so called “trail of tears”) but no part of manifest destiny was the elimination of American Indians as a whole.

Some secular liberals in the south used the bible to defend slavery in much the same way some revisionists today insist it supports abortion and same sex marriage, it was prooftexting and not a legitimate theological argument
 
No, manifest destiny did not include wiping out the natives

There was never any policy promulgated by the US to wipe out any native Americans. Some Indians were savage evil bands of people who wouldn’t act in a civilized manner (such as the Comanche) and they had to be quelled with force. Some tribes signed treaties to relocate and then attempted to renege (the so called “trail of tears”) but no part of manifest destiny was the elimination of American Indians as a whole.

Some secular liberals in the south used the bible to defend slavery in much the same way some revisionists today insist it supports abortion and same sex marriage, it was prooftexting and not a legitimate theological argument
LOL. The trail of tears is US reneging on its obligation. The SCOTUS told andrew jackson that he could not move the cherokee west and he did it anyway.
 
First off, the civilizing of the Native Americans was a moral good. It was not genocide and it was not slaughter and to claim that is pure historical ignorance on your part.

Secondly your claim that the north was not very religious prior to the Civil War, is absolutely false. In fact the north east was the Home to all the most aggressive and puritanical forms of Protestant Christianity.

Also, it was not religious Christians in the English colonies that held slaves, the slavery in North America was predominantly driven by educated Men following Enlightenment principles. For lack of a better term, actually it is a perfect term, they were the liberals of their era who owns slaves.

Slavery has practiced in Catholic colonies in the Americas, was far more restrictive to the slaveowners, slaves had many more ways to be free, and The church never condoned to the practice.


You mean the mainstream political and moral views in effect when America became a power will destroy it? Lol
Civilizing primitive people is never moral or good. It ruins their lives.
 
You mean the mainstream political and moral views in effect when America became a power will destroy it? Lol
Oh, you mean when your white supremacist parents and grand parents were still roaming the earth? You mean, back when they comprised 90% of the population, and ruled by terrorism and intimidation?

Wake up, Rip Van Winkle.

Times have changed.

In 20 years, you and your ilk will be in the minority. The Americans who actually believed in the values professed in our founding documents....and whose blood and sweat actually forced change....will be taking over for you and your dying breed, very soon. It's already happening. You know this. And there's very little you people can do about it. That's why white nationalism is the primary source of terrorist activity in this country. You people are scared. And when you get scared, you ALWAY resort to terroristic tactics. History proves that.
 

Your article only proves individual Christians committed certain acts. And to an extent they were saving these Africans who had been imprisoned by other Africans. Without the slave trade most of them would’ve been killed anyway, or sent to Arabia and castrated then killed. The church did not exercise much control over authorities in the New World in fact the Jesuits were expelled from the empire for advocating too much for the lower orders including slaves

Oh, you mean when your white supremacist parents and grand parents were still roaming the earth? You mean, back when they comprised 90% of the population, and ruled by terrorism and intimidation?

Wake up, Rip Van Winkle.

Times have changed.

In 20 years, you and your ilk will be in the minority. The Americans who actually believed in the values professed in our founding documents....and whose blood and sweat actually forced change....will be taking over for you and your dying breed, very soon. It's already happening. You know this. And there's very little you people can do about it. That's why white nationalism is the primary source of terrorist activity in this country. You people are scared. And when you get scared, you ALWAY resort to terroristic tactics. History proves that.

I’m glad you got that off your chest
 
:LOL:...and Mashmont deflects and dodges, once again.

So much for all of that moronic nonsense about her being considered "among the most brilliant lawyers" and "best judges in the nation". I guess you realized you couldn't back that crap up, pretty quickly, huh?

Barrett is just like almost every other conservative justice these days....a mediocre talent, but a hardcore ideologue. Those attributes...plus her ovaries and plain-Jane face...make her perfect for Trump's base of frustrated, angry white incel types.
Best to be a left wing ideologue, eh?
 
Civilizing primitive people is never moral or good. It ruins their lives.

No it doesn’t.

You were that guy who Rousseau and actually believed man was born free were You?
 
Diversity is such nonsense. Whatever happened to competence, qualifications, and common sense?

LOL, since when have you and your ilk been committed to competence, qualifications and common sense?

Short Answer: Never.

Longer Answer: Only when those factors favor your side.

The simple truth is that racists and bigots HATE and FEAR diversity, because they hate and fear non-white, non-Christian and/or non-male people. Diversity is not just important, it is a crucial component of any democratic society.
 
No it doesn’t.

You were that guy who Rousseau and actually believed man was born free were You?
No. I'm that guy who knows what the story in Genesis means.
Primitive people live in a state of innocence. In the garden. Hunters and gatherers. When they learned about agriculture it ruined their lives. Remember, after Adam and Eve learned to tell good from evil their sons became agriculturalists, Cain a planter and Able a herder. Agriculture made two things possible, living crowded together in cities (civil means cities) and creating a surplus. All of mankinds problems come from two questions- who will rule the city and who will control the surplus. That's what the story of the loss of Eden means. That's what civilization means, the loss of innocence.
When civilized people encounter primitive people and remove their innocence the are playing the role of the serpent in the garden.
 
Amy Coney Barrett is not far right. She would’ve been center left 40 years ago

Not on any planet in this solar system.

40 years ago, the USSC was the most liberal it had ever been....in HISTORY. Coney-Barrett is so radical that she would have never been considered. She's to the right of ANYONE on The Court in 1980.

If nominated, she will be to the right of everyone, save, perhaps, Clarence Thomas on the current USSC. She's an extremist, and there is no liberal counterpart to her on the current court. You people can't see, or acknowledge that, because you are extremists, as well.
 
Best to be a left wing ideologue, eh?
Typical rightwinger.

Everything is a binary choice between polar opposites, right?

It must be nice to live in a world where everything is either black/white or good/evil, huh?

The simple truth is that in today's politics, one party actually looks like America when it gets together...and one party looks like a Klan rally.
 
I’m glad you got that off your chest

And I'm glad you got the chance to publicly embrace your white supremacist nature, for the first time. You must feel relieved.
 
There is no universe (not even the right-wing/alt-right universe) in which Barrett is considered "among the most brilliant lawyers", nor "one of the best judges in the nation". She's a hardcore right-wing, anti-abortion ideologue...with ovaries. Those are her qualifications. Everyone understands that.

And what kind of cretin would even consider physical attractiveness as a criteria (for, or against) in choosing a USSC justice? This just lends insight into the mentality of the lonely white dudes who make up Trump's base.
Didn't you know? Physical attractiveness is an essential qualification for any job a woman aspires to. Ugly women should be kept on the fringes of society and only allowed in places where nobody sees them.
 
No. I'm that guy who knows what the story in Genesis means.
Primitive people live in a state of innocence. In the garden. Hunters and gatherers. When they learned about agriculture it ruined their lives. Remember, after Adam and Eve learned to tell good from evil their sons became agriculturalists, Cain a planter and Able a herder. Agriculture made two things possible, living crowded together in cities (civil means cities) and creating a surplus. All of mankinds problems come from two questions- who will rule the city and who will control the surplus. That's what the story of the loss of Eden means. That's what civilization means, the loss of innocence.
When civilized people encounter primitive people and remove their innocence the are playing the role of the serpent in the garden.

I don’t think that’s what the story means.
Not on any planet in this solar system.

40 years ago, the USSC was the most liberal it had ever been....in HISTORY. Coney-Barrett is so radical that she would have never been considered. She's to the right of ANYONE on The Court in 1980.

If nominated, she will be to the right of everyone, save, perhaps, Clarence Thomas on the current USSC. She's an extremist, and there is no liberal counterpart to her on the current court. You people can't see, or acknowledge that, because you are extremists, as well.

Sotomayo
Didn't you know? Physical attractiveness is an essential qualification for any job a woman aspires to. Ugly women should be kept on the fringes of society and only allowed in places where nobody sees them.
It depends on what you mean by ugly, people born with birth defects or who have burns on their face or not ugly. However feminist should absolutely be kept on the fringes of society
 
Back
Top Bottom