Posted on 07/08/2018 6:06:49 PM PDT by MountainWalker
This guy is followed by Cernovich, Posobiec and James Woods. I know at least Cern and Posobiec are pretty well connected with the Trump Admin, so I think this is somewhat solid. We'll know for sure in 24h.
I heard it was Dolf Lundgren?
Or maybe she wanted to rescue two children from a shithole country? I run in VERY conservative Christian circles and have close friends who have adopted children from China, South Korea, and Africa. I’ll make sure I chew them out for not adopting American babies the next time I see them.
Only 1 woman has been picked by a republican. Reagan of all people, but didn’t he have a democratic senate at the time? He was going to get a top notch candidate like this gem in those situations.
Quite frankly the men have been the flip flopping emotional wreck.
LOL. This is almost as bad as the idiocy during the Jill Stein recounts after the election in 2016. 48 hours into that nonsense, I thought I found my way onto a fan site for “One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest.”
No one has disparaged her character. Virtue signaling is not a crime or misdemeanor. Adopting foreign children through proper channels is not illegal. I have no doubt she plays every hand according to Hoyle.
You’re actually going to castigate someone for adopting children from Haiti? What a disgusting viewpoint. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Her seven kids are seven vulnerabilities.
it’s time we just called them hypocrites — again.
It’s a lazy, empty term, and making up lazy, empty terms is a decidedly liberal enterprise.
you know a term is in serious trouble when using it also commits it; because saying “virtue signaling” is to commit virtue signaling.
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
Thursday, July 5, 2018
At the present time there are those who, basing themselves on observations in the psychological order, have begun to judge indulgently, and even to excuse completely, homosexual relations between certain people. This they do in opposition to the constant teaching of the Magisterium and to the moral sense of the Christian people.
A distinction is drawn, and it seems with some reason, between homosexuals whose tendency comes from a false education, from a lack of normal sexual development, from habit, from bad example, or from other similar causes, and is transitory or at least not incurable; and homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable.
In regard to this second category of subjects, some people conclude that their tendency is so natural that it justifies in their case homosexual relations within a sincere communion of life and love analogous to marriage, in so far as such homosexuals feel incapable of enduring a solitary life.
In the pastoral field, these homosexuals must certainly be treated with understanding and sustained in the hope of overcoming their personal difficulties and their inability to fit into society. Their culpability will be judged with prudence.
But no pastoral method can be employed which would give moral justification to these acts on the grounds that they would be consonant with the condition of such people. For according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality. In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God.
This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of.") –from Persona Humana (1975)
As for Pope Francis, however ambiguous, equivocating or contradictory he may be in his erratic public statements, he can not and will not contradict this.
As for Judge Barrett, if you think she will base her opinions on anything but the U.S. Constitution (and Natural Law, as Bork discussed once upon a time: a reasonable sense of how to construe things justly) -- you are, I think, biased as well as defamatory.
I'm glad we don't have to discuss whether you are unbiased enough to give a sound judgment.
You won't get an answer. Bashing her for being a woman. And a Catholic. And adopting two needy foreign kids. That's a ride the lightning trifecta.
Hard to believe I saw the day when a conservative belittled a woman for having too many kids.
When you have no idea why she adopted children from Haiti, why do you assume it means something bad about her?
That’s sick.
Darn straight! Many families in our church, who are solidly conservative I might add, have had to go overseas to adopt, because the red tape to do so in the US is so deep. It takes a special person to adopt a child, and even moreso to go go through the process to adopt a foreign child. But even that process is not as onerous, or as expensive, as trying to adopt in this country.
Funny how all these people crawling out of the woodwork to criticize Amy Barrett for adopting foreign-born children never seemed to have a problem with it when Laura Ingraham did the same thing.
I like her, but Trump’s a pragmatist, so we shall see tomorrow.
What do you have against Catholics?
Under particular pressure to side with the president are the three red-state Democrats who voted for Justice Neil Gorsuch last year and face difficult reelection campaigns: Sens. Joe Manchin, Heidi Heitkamp, and Joe Donnelly.
So Trump may be shrewdly banking on getting a couple of Democratic votes who can put this nomination over the top even if he loses two female turncoat Republicans.
Can't deny Trump is a pretty shrewd son-of-a-gun.
Then hopefully your gut is way more informed about this nominee than mine. I’m just going with the fact the chances of a female judge being truly strict constructionist conservative are extremely remote. How many female judges are going to understand what “shall not be infringed” means?
The first pick is always out. It’s the second one he really wants. He wants to show the hypocrisy of the leftist feminist.
I’m happy. It’s Trump’s call. Heck....I would have picked 40-year-old Britt Grant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.