Ruth Bader Ginsburg is dead

[NWBuck 8,619]

14 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Yes, Catholics and Protestants believe fetuses are humans, you're right. Also Catholics don't like the death penalty and push for other "human dignity" efforts"

FIFPope Francis-

"Our defense of the innocent unborn, for example, needs to be clear, firm and passionate, for at stake is the dignity of a human life, which is always sacred and demands love for each person, regardless of his or her stage of development.

Equally sacred, however, are the lives of the poor, those already born, the destitute, the abandoned and the underprivileged, the vulnerable infirm and elderly exposed to covert euthanasia, the victims of human trafficking, new forms of slavery, and every form of rejection."
-Pope Francis, 2018.

[hayden_horn 11,401]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

This is stupid. She's in a weird cult. Guess what, so are billions of other people.

why do you keep saying this? i'm confused, must be missing something. is she opus dei or something?

going to religion seems like a losing strategy. that'd be like asking ruth bader ginsburg if her judaism was going to affect her decision making? it's a terrible approach.

full disclosure: i'm (ostensibly/culturally/non-practicing) catholic.

Edited September 23, 2020 by hayden_horn

[Buzzrock 15,115]

13 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

While true, you gotta admit this is a little different. 

The biggest difference is social media IMO.
 

I don’t believe we live in “serious times”, I believe we live in silly and often stupid times. And we happen to have the worst crop of political leaders of my lifetime. 

[elfenix 34,658]

who was the last protestant on the supreme court?

[bolverk 30,231]

6 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

why do you keep saying this? i'm confused, must be missing something. is she opus dei or something?

going to religion seems like a losing strategy. that'd be like asking ruth bader ginsburg if her judaism was going to affect her decision making? it's a terrible approach.

full disclosure: i'm (ostensibly/culturally/non-practicing) catholic.

He's referring to her membership in an organization called People of Praise, which is some sort of Catholic Charismatic offshoot that may have served as the inspiration for the religious nuts in "The Handmaid's Tale."

Quote

 

How Charismatic Catholic Groups inspired 'The Handmaid's Tale'

Members of People of Praise are assigned to personal advisers of the same sex—called a "head" for men and "handmaid" for women, until the rise in popularity of Atwood's novel and the television series based on it forced a change in the latter.

Atwood herself has previously referred to the practices of a charismatic Catholic group motivating her to write The Handmaid's Tale, set in the fictional Gilead, where women's bodies are governed and treated as the property of the state under a theocratic regime.

"I delayed writing it for about three years after I got the idea because I felt it was too crazy," Atwood told The New York Times Book Review in 1986.

'Then two things happened. I started noticing that a lot of the things I thought I was more or less making up were now happening, and indeed more of them have happened since the publication of the book."

She added: "There is a sect now, a Catholic charismatic spinoff sect, which calls the women handmaids. They don't go in for polygamy of this kind but they do threaten the handmaids according to the biblical verse I use in the book—sit down and shut up."

While Atwood has not elaborated on which sect she was referring to, a New Yorker profile of the author in 2017 mentions that in a box of newspaper clippings the author collected while writing the novel, there is "an Associated Press item reported on a Catholic congregation in New Jersey being taken over by a fundamentalist sect in which wives were called 'handmaidens'—a word that Atwood had underlined."

The clipping includes a spokesperson for the People of Hope sect based in Newark, New Jersey saying, "We're all Roman Catholics. We differ in the sense that we are a Charismatic group, which would mean that we have prayer meetings, during which there is raising of hands, singing and speaking in tongues."

 

 

[workswithseed 2,201]

1 minute ago, elfenix said:

who was the last protestant on the supreme court?

 Justice John Paul Stevens

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11,669]

2 minutes ago, elfenix said:

who was the last protestant on the supreme court?

i believe rehnquist.  i remember noting it at the time that the court was not entirely Jewish and Catholic, a streak that looks to continue.

[TwiceHorn 31,987]

23 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

why do you keep saying this? i'm confused, must be missing something. is she opus dei or something?

going to religion seems like a losing strategy. that'd be like asking ruth bader ginsburg if her judaism was going to affect her decision making? it's a terrible approach.

full disclosure: i'm (ostensibly/culturally/non-practicing) catholic.

https://peopleofpraise.org/about/who-we-are/

I haven't done a deep dive, but of what I know it began as a "Charismatic Catholic" community, but is now open to all sects, as long as they observe the Nicene Creed.

Charismatics are a religious trait often associated with "evangelicals" and protestants more generally, but it's not synonymous.  For Catholics, I think it's namely the practice of worship and Christian life outside the rituals and liturgy of the church.  That can take on some pretty fundagelical aspects.

Frankly, I don't think it's as creepy as Opus Dei and I would be wary of the usual religious skeptics' analysis of it as a cult.

The "Handmaid's Tale" thing is bullshit.  But, it is a religious organization of recent vintage, with some fundagelical tendencies.  In that sense, it did inspire Handmaid's tale.

All that said, Barrett seems to be a pretty hardcore Catholic of the type that is pretty right-wing.  People of Praise may reinforce that, but I don't think it's the genesis of it.

Edited September 23, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Buzzrock 15,115]

13 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Lol at comparing Trump to any of them. Flawed as they all were, they all actually cared about the country and were capable of empathy in general.

Trump is a sociopath who doesn't understand the feelings of others. He is a useful tool for Mitch and Barr who are taking all this too far. Never in our history is there anything comparable. Wake up. 

If you want the deregulated lawless world that Trump is bringing, then that's fine too.  Let's do it.  I've had to fight just to eat before in this country. I'll do it again.  Like Trump said, what do you, buzzrock, have to lose?

 

If you think any National politician cares about anything more than power then you have been played. Pure and simple. I don’t care at all who anyone votes for, but if you’ve got a poster on your wall of any of them then you’ve been had. 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11,669]

2 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

 Justice John Paul Stevens

looks like this is right and my memory was off.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/11/weekinreview/11liptak.html

article about the "unthinkable" act of having a non-protestant

[Anastasis 23,699]

People of Praise is not a catholic organization you dim whits. 

[Anastasis 23,699]

Sounds like really scary stuff. 

How does the People of Praise serve the broader society?

In 1981, in response to a call from God, we established Trinity Schools—private Christian schools in South Bend, Indiana, Falls Church, Virginia, and Eagan, Minnesota. These middle/high schools have received a total of eight Blue Ribbon awards from the U.S. Department of Education. The Trinity curriculum has also served as a model for more than 30 private and public charter schools nationwide. Additionally, members of the People of Praise founded Trinity Academy, a middle/high school in Portland, Oregon, as well as Praise Academy, an elementary school located in an impoverished neighborhood of Shreveport, Louisiana.

In 2002, inspired by the Holy Spirit, some People of Praise members began moving into some of America's poorest neighborhoods. Since then, we have lived closely with our neighbors and worked together to help meet pressing neighborhood needs. Our efforts include: running camps for hundreds of children, repairing neighborhood homes, hosting prayer meetings, growing healthy food on an urban farm. Longtime local residents have credited these efforts with lowering the crime rate and making the neighborhoods more beautiful and peaceful places to live.

People of Praise community life provides a natural support for marriages and families. This has led us to develop Marriage in Christ, a course for married couples. Marriage in Christ helps couples renew their love and affection for each other while building crucial habits of prayer, conversation and forgiveness. More than 1,300 couples have completed the program.

In addition, branches of the People of Praise in various cities have many local outreach activities, from running prayer meetings to serving the needy.

[bolverk 30,231]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

https://peopleofpraise.org/about/who-we-are/

I haven't done a deep dive, but of what I know it began as a "Charismatic Catholic" community, but is now open to all sects, as long as they observe the Nicene Creed.

Charismatics are a religious trait often associated with "evangelicals" and protestants more generally, but it's not synonymous.

Frankly, I don't think it's as creepy as Opus Dei and I would be wary of the usual religious skeptics' analysis of it as a cult.

The "Handmaid's Tale" thing is bullshit.  But, it is a religious organization of recent vintage, with some fundagelical tendencies.  In that sense, it did inspire Handmaid's tale.

Yeah, I'd never heard of the organization until a couple of days ago and haven't done a deep dive myself. The Handmaid's Tale thing is just something I came across.

[hayden_horn 11,401]

6 minutes ago, bolverk said:

He's referring to her membership in an organization called People of Praise, which is some sort of Catholic Charismatic offshoot that may have served as the inspiration for the religious nuts in "The Handmaid's Tale."

 

 

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

https://peopleofpraise.org/about/who-we-are/

I haven't done a deep dive, but of what I know it began as a "Charismatic Catholic" community, but is now open to all sects, as long as they observe the Nicene Creed.

Charismatics are a religious trait often associated with "evangelicals" and protestants more generally, but it's not synonymous.

Frankly, I don't think it's as creepy as Opus Dei and I would be wary of the usual religious skeptics' analysis of it as a cult.

The "Handmaid's Tale" thing is bullshit.  But, it is a religious organization of recent vintage, with some fundagelical tendencies.  In that sense, it did inspire Handmaid's tale.

thanks for the answers and perspective. i worked at a catholic summer camp once upon a time, and the very worst were the charismatic catholics. not surprisingly, they were primarily aggies, and wanted to center the camp around the catholic part (ie, bring reconciliation to camp) instead of the summer part. really missed the mark, imo.

nevertheless, unless she has some crazy decision precedents, i think religion should largely be off limits.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

5 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

If you think any National politician cares about anything more than power then you have been played. Pure and simple. I don’t care at all who anyone votes for, but if you’ve got a poster on your wall of any of them then you’ve been had. 

Both sides!

[Anastasis 23,699]

2 minutes ago, bolverk said:

The Handmaid's Tale thing is just something I came across.

Yeah, it is getting repeated on the twitters a lot and it is bullshit. 

[bolverk 30,231]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

People of Praise is not a catholic organization you dim whits. 

I specifically called it an offshoot.

[TwiceHorn 31,987]

4 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Yeah, I'd never heard of the organization until a couple of days ago and haven't done a deep dive myself. The Handmaid's Tale thing is just something I came across.

Yeah I wrote that before you posted, wasn't digging at you.  The Newsweek article has been rewritten to soften the assertion that PoP was the inspiration for Handmaid's Tale.  Groups of its type certainly were, but not Pop specifically.

There is the "connection" that spiritual sponsors in PoP are referred to as "handmaids," but I think that's an unfortunate coincidence.  That Catholics in the organization are assigned a lay spiritual "partner," as opposed to clerical, is pretty novel for Catholics and kind of explains its whole reason for existence, as far as I can tell, which is to practice Christianity outside the rigid boundaries of the Catholic Church.

Of course, I am a big believer in at least hierarchical guardrails in religious organizations, because when laypeople get up to their own religious interpretations, without those guardrails (congregationalism), shenanigans always result.

Edited September 23, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Buzzrock 15,115]

34 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

What are y'all gonna say when a Muslim goes in?

I will groan, only because my Fox News lovin old man will lose his mind and be a pain in my ass.

Otherwise I won’t care. 

[wildcat09 29,556]

37 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

What are y'all gonna say when a Muslim goes in?

It depends on whether they’re normal Muslim-Americans or members of ISIS.

[Buzzrock 15,115]

15 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Both sides!

Absolutely.

[SimonBolivar 11,031]

20 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

I will groan, only because my Fox News lovin old man will lose his mind and be a pain in my ass.

Otherwise I won’t care. 

Look on the bright side, he'll probably be dead by then.

[bad_teammate 13,479]

48 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

why do you keep saying this?

Do I keep saying it?

I just mean religion in general. It's all kind of weird and insane (by design; the grand mystery) and watching people trying to parse out why THIS instantiation is actually bad is laughable because it's all just cover for their political rage (justified or not).

[Bozo_Casanova 26,773]

32 minutes ago, elfenix said:

who was the last protestant on the supreme court?

Supreme Court may be nominally Lutheran, but only just
 

 

[workswithseed 2,201]

22 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

It depends on whether they’re normal Muslim-Americans or members of ISIS.

Very ISIS like.

30 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Sounds like really scary stuff. 

How does the People of Praise serve the broader society?

In 1981, in response to a call from God, we established Trinity Schools—private Christian schools in South Bend, Indiana, Falls Church, Virginia, and Eagan, Minnesota. These middle/high schools have received a total of eight Blue Ribbon awards from the U.S. Department of Education. The Trinity curriculum has also served as a model for more than 30 private and public charter schools nationwide. Additionally, members of the People of Praise founded Trinity Academy, a middle/high school in Portland, Oregon, as well as Praise Academy, an elementary school located in an impoverished neighborhood of Shreveport, Louisiana.

In 2002, inspired by the Holy Spirit, some People of Praise members began moving into some of America's poorest neighborhoods. Since then, we have lived closely with our neighbors and worked together to help meet pressing neighborhood needs. Our efforts include: running camps for hundreds of children, repairing neighborhood homes, hosting prayer meetings, growing healthy food on an urban farm. Longtime local residents have credited these efforts with lowering the crime rate and making the neighborhoods more beautiful and peaceful places to live.

People of Praise community life provides a natural support for marriages and families. This has led us to develop Marriage in Christ, a course for married couples. Marriage in Christ helps couples renew their love and affection for each other while building crucial habits of prayer, conversation and forgiveness. More than 1,300 couples have completed the program.

In addition, branches of the People of Praise in various cities have many local outreach activities, from running prayer meetings to serving the needy.

 

[Anastasis 23,699]

34 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

It depends on whether they’re normal Muslim-Americans or members of ISIS.

Look this little ecumenical charismatic 1960's counterculture based religious community is not really my thing, but I really hope that somebody compares it to ISIS during the confirmation hearing for the fucking lulz.  

Edited September 23, 2020 by Anastasis

[JimmyJames 12,271]

45 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

People of Praise is not a catholic organization you dim whits. 

So is it like the organization Bill McCartney started after his quarterback knocked up his daughter? 

[wildcat09 29,556]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Look this little ecumenical charismatic 1960's counterculture based religious community is not really my thing, but I really hope that somebody compares it to ISIS during the confirmation hearing for the fucking lulz.  

For fuck's sake, the intention was clearly not to actually compare this group to ISIS but to respond to the idiot's stupid question with an obvious answer. And you know that.

[Anastasis 23,699]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

For fuck's sake, the intention was clearly not to actually compare this group to ISIS but to respond to the idiot's stupid question with an obvious answer. And you know that.

Don't whine wildcat.  You know the contrast being drawn and the context of the discussion. 

[BradInATX 9,208]

No matter who the Republicans nominate, there will be a handful of Democrats who grandstand and hyperbolize so much that they are going to look like ridiculous fear-mongering attention-whores and lose credibility for any legitimate objections to the nominee. And of course the Republicans will tie those lawmakers' extreme gnashing of teeth back to Biden and hurt some of his moderate street cred.

This is a huge landmine for the Democrats. IMO they should just refuse to participate. The Republicans are going to ram through whoever they want to ram through. It's a more powerful statement to sit out than to give the spotlight to a few of the grandstanders that the GOP will be able to label as impetuous crybabies mad that they're not getting their way. Which will 100% happen, because Democrats lack self-control in the realpolitik game.

If I were Trump, and my singular goal was re-election at all costs (which it would be because in this scenario I'm Trump), I'm going to look for a nominee that will have some sort of stance or history that will cause the Democrats to lose their absolute minds, but not the electorate, just to stoke the fire. I'd find someone who took a right-leaning view about some sort of far-reaching extreme of the LGBTQ world and watch the Dems lose their mind over something that only true blue Democrats care about. 

Edited September 23, 2020 by BradInATX

[Anastasis 23,699]

2 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

No matter who the Republicans nominate, there will be a handful of Democrats who grandstand and hyperbolize so much that they are going to look like ridiculous fear-mongering attention-whores and lose credibility for any legitimate objections to the nominee. And of course the Republicans will tie those lawmakers' extreme gnashing of teeth back to Biden and hurt some of his moderate street cred.

This is a huge landmine for the Democrats. IMO they should just refuse to participate. The Republicans are going to ram through whoever they want to ram through. It's a more powerful statement to sit out than to give the spotlight to a few of the grandstanders that will the GOP will be able to label as grandstanding crybabies. Which will 100% happen.

If I were Trump, and my singular goal was re-election at all costs (which it would be because in this scenario I'm Trump), I'm going to look for a nominee that will have some sort of stance or history that will cause the Democrats to lose their absolute minds, but not the electorate, just to stoke the fire.

Agree with a lot of this.  They need to tread lightly on some of these angles of attack that are being tested. It's pretty simple in my mind how they should articulate the opposition. It;s 100% about how MG was treated in the run up to the election, and the inequity of the current situation in contrast. That is more than enough reason to oppose the confirmation. Just say that and leave the bigotry and fear monger attention whoring out of it. 

[BradInATX 9,208]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Just say that and leave the bigotry and fear monger attention whoring out of it. 

But, and you already know this, there is a zero percent chance of that happening. 

[Anastasis 23,699]

Just now, BradInATX said:

But, and you already know this, there is a zero percent chance of that happening. 

Politics.  A strange game. 

[A-Tex Devil 2,492]

I gnashed my teeth for 5 days at the hypocrisy, but now that Romney isn't holding out, I agree with those that, barring a Bork-like nominee, say the Dems should allow for a smooth process, noting concerns with the nominee's jurisprudence during the proceedings, but allowing for a vote with little fanfare.

Also, STFU about retaliation, packing the courts, etc. (for now). SCOTUS doesn't get voter turnout for the Dems.  It has helped with the donations now, but Dems need to focus that $$ on turnout.  

Then if Dems win senate, house, and presidency, use every law available and every tactic used by Mitch to its advantage.  Add two justices, kill the filibuster, etc.

Do everything it takes short of constitutional amendment to end this tyranny of the minority.

 

..... in other words, grey rock the Republicans.  I don't know how they would handle stoic, non-crazed reaction to the nominating process.

Edited September 23, 2020 by A-Tex Devil

[elfenix 34,658]

Add 2 to lose 6-5 instead of 6-3, hooray

[workswithseed 2,201]

37 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

For fuck's sake, the intention was clearly not to actually compare this group to ISIS but to respond to the idiot's stupid question with an obvious answer. And you know that.

Idiot? You just seem to hate someone because of religious reasons. Get the fuck out of here.

[washparkhorn 9,967]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Yeah, it is getting repeated on the twitters a lot and it is bullshit. 

You would agree the people deserve to know how the handmaiden in charge of Coney-Barrett would advise the nominee, correct?  After all, it is the handmaiden's judgment that will advise Coney-Barrett on the spiritual struggles she might encounter. Seems relevant to me. 

Edited September 23, 2020 by washparkhorn

[JimmyJames 12,271]

35 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Idiot? You just seem to hate someone because of religious reasons. Get the fuck out of here.

The Snowflakes don’t get to determine who stays and who goes. 

[Anastasis 23,699]

1 minute ago, washparkhorn said:

You would agree the people deserve to know how the handmaiden in charge of Coney-Barrett would advise the nominee, correct?  After all, it is the handmaiden's judgment that will advise Coney-Barrett on the spiritual struggles she might encounter. Seems relevant to me. 

No.  Get the fuck out with that. 

[washparkhorn 9,967]

3 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

I like how the Catholic lady is somehow a big deal because she's Catholic.  My question would be how that makes her different from a shithead like Tom Cotton or Ted Cruz?  Is there any nuance to her Catholicism or is she just like the rest of them?

No difference. 

I wouldn't want Cotton or Cruz in charge of privacy rights, would you?

[wildcat09 29,556]

36 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Idiot? You just seem to hate someone because of religious reasons. Get the fuck out of here.

Who do I hate for religious reasons? You? Or Barrett? I don’t hate you, even though you are an idiot who asks stupid “durrrrrrrr you’d love her if she was Muslim wouldn’t you?!” shit. I don’t really know enough about Barrett to hate her, but I’m sure I’ll hate her based on her SCOTUS decisions soon enough. It won’t be for religious reasons though, unless you consider not wanting her to impose her own religious beliefs on the rest of America as religious discrimination.

[washparkhorn 9,967]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

No.  Get the fuck out with that. 

Yet we ask those who have worked with S.Ct. nominees to provide their insight into how a nominee might judge a case all the time. If she has a controlling spiritual advisor, that is an important piece of evidence necessary to gather in order to advise and consent.

[Anastasis 23,699]

3 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Yet we ask those who have worked with S.Ct. nominees to provide their insight into how a nominee might judge a case all the time. If she has a controlling spiritual advisor, that is an important piece of evidence necessary to gather in order to advise and consent.

"Controlling spiritual advisor".  Come on wash.  This is anti-catholic trope adjacent nonsense. 

Edited September 23, 2020 by Anastasis

[washparkhorn 9,967]

I didn't write their dogma. With Coney-Barrett, we get her and her handmaiden-in-charge.

Can she ignore the handmaiden and do her job (with fealty to the Constitution as required, and not fealty to her handmaiden). 

The right to privacy is fragile because the Framers did not think it was necessary to tell people to mind their business. Coney-Barrett stands ready to eject it - over abortion.

That's fucked up. If she wants ban an abortion and eliminate the right to privacy, pass a Constitutional Amendment.

[TwiceHorn 31,987]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

"Controlling spiritual advisor".  Come on wash.

I don't know what the advisors in PoP really do.  I assume, perhaps overly benignly, that they are like a sponsor in AA or an "accountability partner" that gets used in various spiritual/behavioral problems like debt management, dieting/weight management, various compulsive behaviors (booze, drugs, sex, porn, gambling), etc.  It's just someone that you check your head with to make sure you are seeing things "straight" through whatever lens is desired, be it Christianity, or Dave Ramsey, or AA/NA or whatever.

[workswithseed 2,201]

13 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Who do I hate for religious reasons? You? Or Barrett? I don’t hate you, even though you are an idiot who asks stupid “durrrrrrrr you’d love her if she was Muslim wouldn’t you?!” shit. I don’t really know enough about Barrett to hate her, but I’m sure I’ll hate her based on her SCOTUS decisions soon enough. It won’t be for religious reasons though, unless you consider not wanting her to impose her own religious beliefs on the rest of America as religious discrimination.

Thank you for being clear. 

[Anastasis 23,699]

9 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

I didn't write their dogma.

Please link me to the written material that you are basing your assessment of their dogma regarding the controlling handmaiden-in-charge that pulls the puppet strings on ACB's legal interpretations.  Would also be helpful if you can cite some specific examples of how this controlling religious influence has exerted their control on her legal decisions to date.

[washparkhorn 9,967]

8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't know what the advisors in PoP really do.  I assume, perhaps overly benignly, that they are like a sponsor in AA or an "accountability partner" that gets used in various spiritual/behavioral problems like debt management, dieting/weight management, various compulsive behaviors (booze, drugs, sex, porn, gambling), etc.  It's just someone that you check your head with to make sure you are seeing things "straight" through whatever lens is desired, be it Christianity, or Dave Ramsey, or AA/NA or whatever.

The National Catholic Registry explains the dogma well: https://www.ncronline.org/news/people/prospective-supreme-court-nominee-puts-spotlight-people-praise

 

Quote

Reimers critiques the lack of confidentiality in this model, as it has been practiced at People of Praise, as well as the confusion of pastoral care with governance of the covenanted communities, since "heads" are also leaders in the community.

"These two aspects of People of Praise headship are a matter of grave concern and must surely give us pause. Taken together they imply that the People of Praise member's life is not his own, his or her self is not his or her own," he wrote in Not Reliable Guides.

"As in [other covenanted communities], the distinction between the secular and the religious is broken down, so that all one's decisions and dealings become the concern of one's head, and in turn potentially become known to the leadership," wrote Reimers.

Reimers has also critiqued the People of Praise in an article called "Charismatic Covenant Community: A Failed Promise" that ran in Cultic Studies Journal in 1986. He declined to be interviewed for this article, noting that he "no longer wants to address my experiences in the People of Praise."

The group's history is intertwined with other "covenanted communities" that grew out of the charismatic renewal movement after Vatican II, although People of Praise has no formal relationship with other communities. It is not a member of the Vatican-approved Catholic Fraternity of Charismatic Covenant Communities and Fellowships, because it is an ecumenical group, Lent said.

 

 

[washparkhorn 9,967]

Ana - see above.

And remember, she was never a judge before Trump appointed her to the 7th Cir.

Edited September 23, 2020 by washparkhorn

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

 

This is a huge landmine for the Democrats. IMO they should just refuse to participate. The Republicans are going to ram through whoever they want to ram through. It's a more powerful statement to sit out than to give the spotlight to a few of the grandstanders that the GOP will be able to label as impetuous crybabies mad that they're not getting their way. Which will 100% happen, because Democrats lack self-control in the realpolitik game.

 

This would be good tactic. Walks the fine line of being defiant but not giving easy sound bites to Republicans and Trump from hearings. But politicians love the cameras and grandstanding. They see it as a way to keep their profile up. 

1 hour ago, A-Tex Devil said:

Also, STFU about retaliation, packing the courts, etc. (for now). SCOTUS doesn't get voter turnout for the Dems.  It has helped with the donations now, but Dems need to focus that $$ on turnout.  

Then if Dems win senate, house, and presidency, use every law available and every tactic used by Mitch to its advantage.  Add two justices, kill the filibuster, etc.

Do everything it takes short of constitutional amendment to end this tyranny of the minority.

 

..... in other words, grey rock the Republicans.  I don't know how they would handle stoic, non-crazed reaction to the nominating process.

Do you think Biden and Dems in Senate races should avoid questions about court packing or new states etc? 
 

I don’t see how they don’t get put on the record on those proposed radical changes. And they should be forced to make a stand on them. Big, landmark changes like that should be sold to the public and run on. See what the people want. 
 

I’m interested to see how Biden handles it. He was explicitly against Court packing before. I guess he try to justify his flip by saying the rules are being broken now by Rs even if they aren’t.