Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $25,028
29%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 29% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Keyword: religioustest

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • The Media's Religious Test

    10/16/2011 9:23:09 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 7 replies
    Human Events ^ | October 17, 2011 | Gary Bauer
    I believe efforts to disqualify Mitt Romney as a presidential contender because of his Mormon faith are outrageous and unfair. Apparently, a lot of people in the liberal media agree with me. Unfortunately, they are hypocrites. The media are ignoring their own established religious test—against candidates whose evangelical or Catholic faith guides their political beliefs. Having momentarily discovered an appreciation for the Constitution, liberal journalists are reminding conservative Christians who question Romney’s faith that our founders prohibited a religious test as a qualification for elected office. “It was only a matter of time before some bigot drew a bead on...
  • Nikki Haley, Bobby Jindal and America's new religious litmus test

    06/25/2010 10:48:44 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 64 replies
    Washington Post ^ | 06/25/2010 | Aseem Shukla
    Last night's Republican primary runoff in South Carolina plausibly clears the way for Nikki Haley to join Bobby Jindal as governors with an epochal distinction: two Indian Americans leading two Southern states. Belonging to a community that makes up less than a percentage of the U.S. population, their accomplishment is momentous, even more so because Haley would be the first female governor of her state. Coupled with President Obama's own astounding win last year--he carried North Carolina, Virginia and Florida--a credible argument could be made that in politics, at least, a post-racial South is emerging. Haley endured ludicrous, unsubstantiated allegations...
  • Religion may hinder Romney in '08

    04/28/2006 1:47:54 PM PDT · by SDGOP · 310 replies · 3,221+ views
    Prominent, respectable Evangelical Christians have told me, not for quotation, that millions of their co-religionists cannot and will not vote for Romney for president solely because he is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If Romney is nominated and their abstention results in the election of Hillary Rodham Clinton, that's just too bad. The evangelicals are adamant, saying there is no way Romney can win them over.
  • Is America ready to elect a Mormon as its President?

    12/17/2005 8:39:05 AM PST · by Mr. Blonde · 268 replies · 3,839+ views
    Times UK ^ | Dec. 16, 2005 | Tim Reid
    HE MADE millions as a businessman, saved the scandal-plagued 2002 Winter Olympics, appeals to social conservatives, is liked by moderates, boasts chiselled good looks and has been a successful Republican governor in one of America’s most liberal states. In Mitt Romney, the Massachusetts Governor who all but threw his hat into the 2008 presidential race yesterday, Republicans have the almost perfect candidate. Except for one potential problem: Mr Romney is a Mormon. After announcing that he would not be seeking a second term as Massachusetts governor, a widely anticipated move that clears the way for a 2008 White House bid,...
  • Durbin: Pro-Life Stance Would 'Disqualify' Roberts

    07/24/2005 10:06:46 AM PDT · by Tumbleweed_Connection · 78 replies · 2,205+ views
    NewsMax ^ | 7/24/05 | Limbacher
    The Senate's number two Democrat said Sunday that if Judge John Roberts doesn't recognize that the Constitution's right to privacy covers the Roe vs Wade abortion decision, it would "disqualify" him from serving on the Supreme Court. Asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if President Bush had "the same right" to appoint pro-life justices that President Clinton had to appoint pro-choice justices, Durbin at first insisted, "I'm not looking for a litmus test." "As important as reproductive rights and women's rights are, I just basically want to know that if the next case involving privacy and personal freedom came up,...
  • Democrats vow to learn court pick's abortion views

    07/21/2005 8:31:34 AM PDT · by Tumbleweed_Connection · 32 replies · 637+ views
    Boston Globe ^ | 7/21/05 | Rick Klein
    Senate Democrats promised yesterday to scrutinize the positions of Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. on key social issues, and said they intend to force him to clearly state his position on whether the Constitution gives women a right to abortion during his upcoming confirmation hearings. As Roberts made the rounds yesterday on Capitol Hill, Democratic senators gave him a warm reception, but served notice to their Republican colleagues that they want to see memos Roberts produced as deputy solicitor general under President George H.W. Bush, whose administration advocated the reversal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing...
  • Roberts Likely to Face Abortion Questions

    07/19/2005 6:20:46 PM PDT · by Happy2BMe · 113 replies · 2,302+ views
    WASHINGTON -- A likable lawyer who represented industries in cases at the Supreme Court before becoming an appeals court judge is President Bush's choice to fill his first high court vacancy. John G. Roberts Jr., 50, who has been praised by conservatives and liberals, also has the shortest of track records to be attacked during the confirmation process.
  • Catholics Not Wanted (Constitution and Judiciary)

    10/26/2003 12:33:46 PM PST · by nickcarraway · 3 replies · 154+ views
    e3mil.com ^ | 10/25/03 | Ken Concannon
    Last month, Miguel Estrada, who had been nominated by the Bush administration over two years ago to fill a vacancy on the Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington DC, threw in the towel. He had had enough. His nomination had been blocked first by liberal Democratic senators who controlled the Senate Judiciary Committee — and the confirmation process — throughout 2001 and 2002, and then finally by the same liberal coalition whose filibuster of his nomination throughout 2003 prevented the full Senate from voting on his nomination. Fed up, the conservative nominee withdrew his own nomination. Following the withdrawal, two...
  • Ignorance or Malicious Intent? "No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to..."

    08/07/2003 11:28:29 AM PDT · by Polycarp · 20 replies · 254+ views
    NewsMax.com ^ | 8/7/03 | Phil Brennan
    Reprinted from NewsMax.com Ignorance or Malicious Intent?Phil BrennanWednesday, Aug. 6, 2003 No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. – Article VI of the U.S. Constitution When Sacramento bishop William K. Weigand called on Gov. Gray Davis to renounce his support of abortion or stop taking Holy Communion, one of Davis' aides, Russ Lopez, indignantly blasted the bishop for "telling the faithful how to practice their faith." Lopez was either displaying an appalling ignorance or engaging in sheer malice: He should be aware that a bishop is a...
  • Are Liberals Imposing a Religious Test on Judges?

    08/05/2003 6:17:56 AM PDT · by TastyManatees · 16 replies · 293+ views
    Human Events Online ^ | 8/1/03 | David Freddoso
    ... Sen. Hatch was quoted in the New York Times saying that liberals are imposing "an anti-religious litmus test" against appellate court nominees "who openly adhere to Catholic and Baptist doctrines" on abortion. Is Hatch right?SEN. MARIA CANTWELL (D.-WASH.): Isn’t Hatch the one who brought up what the nominee’s religion was?In the hearing. Is Hatch right that anyone who openly adheres to Catholic and Baptist doctrines on abortion—is there a litmus test against such nominees?CANTWELL: Senator Hatch raised the question of the person’s religion. I think the Republicans are the people who are raising questions about people’s religion.But as far...
  • Pryor Prejudice

    06/12/2003 4:29:13 PM PDT · by big'ol_freeper · 1 replies · 114+ views
    Crisis Magazine Email | 12 June 2003 | Deal Hudson
    Dear Friend, It was almost four months ago to the day that I first told you about Miguel Estrada, one of President Bush's judicial nominations for the US Court of Appeals. A highly respected lawyer in his own right and eminently qualified for the position, a vote on his nomination has nevertheless been filibustered by Senate Democrats determined to keep him out at any cost. The reason? Estrada's conservatism scares them, plain and simple. They'll do anything to keep judges like him -- mainly, pro-life conservatives -- out of the higher courts. Most all of Bush's nominations have been stalled...