Posted on 09/27/2020 9:57:32 AM PDT by Signalman
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., sent a letter to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., urging him to pledge not to use “anti-Catholic, anti-Christian, anti-faith” interrogations in the upcoming confirmation hearing for President Trump’s SCOTUS nominee Amy Coney Barrett.
“There is a long history of anti-Catholic hatred by some in this country, and a growing tide of anti-religious animus on the Left now, and I hope you and your colleagues will not play any further part in it,” Hawley wrote. “Already, members of your caucus have said that they will do this again—that the nominee’s religious views will be a prime focus,” Hawley added.
In the letter, Hawley draws attention to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, who made “egregious personal attacks” on Barrett during her previous confirmation to become a federal judge. According to Hawley, Democratic senators’ targeting of Barrett’s Catholicism, specifically Feinstein’s infamous comments claiming that “the dogma lives loudly within you,” is “a clear and condescending disparagement of Judge Barrett’s Catholicism.”
“Religious bigotry has no place in the United States Senate. I ask that you and all your colleagues reject your past acts of intolerance, and commit to considering Judge Barrett’s nomination on the merits of her qualifications, not by slandering her faith—and the faith of millions of Americans,” Hawley said.
“Democrats’ offensive and wholly inappropriate attacks must not be repeated in this confirmation process,” he added.
While Hawley noted that Democrats’ application of “religious tests” has become more frequent in recent years, he condemned their actions and emphasized that the Constitution “bans religious tests” for those entering into a public service position in the United States.
“Over and over these last four years, your caucus has sought to return to the days of ‘religious tests,’ to exclude people of faith from public office and from the public square,” Hawley wrote. “Your members have attacked and attempted to disqualify nominees by questioning their views on the nature of sin, their beliefs about heaven and hell, their memberships in religious organizations, and the activities of their churches. But our Constitution bans religious tests.”
But our Constitution bans religious tests.
Lindsey needs to stop offenders with his chairman’s gavel. pulling a Nadler.
Changes the Dems will make to the Constitution are requiring religious litmus tests, i.e. Believing Christians and Jews are ineligible to hold appointed office; and conservatives/Republicans charged with crimes are considered guilty until proven innocent.
Uh, doesn’t rip van byeDUHn claim to be catholic. And doesn’t nanzi also claim to be catholic? And.....................so what? Saint jfk was catholic.
It's the group she belongs to outside the Church that's raising questions.
Constitution? WE DON’T NEED NO STINKIN’ CONSTITUTION!
It's not Catholicism they are questioning it's the "handmaiden's tale" inspiring group that Barrett belongs to outside the Church that people have questions about. One the one hand she described her husband in a way that's almost subservient to her career, on the other she's part of a group with a rigid hierarchy and traditional roles.
“There is a long history of anti-Catholic hatred by some in this country, and a growing tide of anti-religious animus on the Left now, and I hope you and your colleagues will not play any further part in it,” Hawley wrote. “Already, members of your caucus have said that they will do this again—that the nominee’s religious views will be a prime focus,” Hawley added. …Looks like Mr. Hawley doesn’t know what he’s really up against.
“We must combat religion. That is the A-B-C of all materialism and, consequently, of Marxism.”Not to mention that the papacy is named as communism’s first “enemy” in the Manifesto.
— Lenin
“We hate Christians and Christianity. Even the best of them must be considered our worst enemies. They teach love of one’s neighbor and mercy, which is against our principles. Christian love is an impediment to the development of the revolution. Down with love of our neighbor. What we want is hatred. We must know how to hate. Only then shall we conquer the universe.
— Anatoly Lunacharsky, first USSR education commissar
Yes it is Catholicism they are questioning, as it were. Which of the aforementioned SCOTUS Catholics have been adherents to Catholicism instead of Marxism?
“...It’s the group she belongs to outside the Church that’s raising questions.”
**************************************************************
Article VI specifies that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” That “questionable” group is a religious group. Hawley’s right— the “no religious test” prohibition applies to religion which may or may not be a part of a particular established “religion”.
Democrats know it is wrong, but that won’t stop them from using it. It didn’t work with John Kennedy and it won’t work here either.
“...they are questioning it’s the “handmaiden’s tale” inspiring group that Barrett belongs to outside the Church...”
*********************************************
You do understand that it’s a canard that her group inspired the “Handmaiden’s Tale”?
I think we should be textualists, or not. The religious test clause refers to explicit statutory requirement for holding public offices. These were common in colonial times. That’s the context from which it arises, and that’s what the explicit language of the clause means.
A Senator holding the subjective belief that faithful Catholics should not be put on SCOTUS, and voting accordingly, is not a religious test. Obama tried to pull this same crap in the context of his efforts to flood as many Muslim refugees into the country as he could. Don’t get me wrong: I’m a Catholic and a huge fan of Justice Barrett. I don’t think anyone should vote against her because she is Catholic, but doing so would not violate the religious test clause
The Left doesn’t give a wit about the Constitution.
As to the democrats’ anti-everything, concerning a posting of a supreme court judge, ask them this:
“Would you rather have Baphomet statue in the halls of Congress?”
If they say ‘no’, then play on that hypocrisy!
It matters now as people are more anti God. Hence the increasing attacks on the Catholic church
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.