[2ndDivisionVet]

They know they're going to lose this one. I don't know which klown kollege this solicitor general attended, but he learned his lessons well.

[skeeter]

I dunno, can we trust the female members of the court in the Hobby Lobby case?

[cripplecreek]

MSLSD Doesn’t have any choice in the matter.

[colorado tanker]

I sure hope we can trust them. I’m counting on them!

[slumber1]

Did he ask whether or not they could trust the Jewish members of the SC?

[jersey117]

Can we trust the liberal females?

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

How long before we see MSNBC, and the rest of the MSM, go into full campaign mode against “activist judges”?

[ex-snook]

Joy Reid is a propagandist for depravity.

[Viennacon]

Panic is setting in.

[loveliberty2]

The historical ignorance of Reid and other 21st Century American citizens, born into a nation whose Founders' revolutionary passion for individual liberty, largely derived from their religious beliefs, now allows Reid and other "progressives" to spout their ignorance, protected by a Constitution which protects their free speech. They would do well to familiarize themselves with the foundations of thought from which their freedoms were derived.

A good beginning for her might be to know who John Adams was, his role in the adoption of our Declaration of Independence, and his beliefs about the qualities which might be most desirable in America's leaders if liberty was to be preserved.

The second President of the U. S., John Adams, a signer of the Constitution, in his First Inaugural's closing paragraph, laid out his understanding of the qualifications for the Office of President.

Inaugural Address of President John Adams

- (Excerpted & reformatted final words)

Philadelphia, March 4, 1797

“. . . as something may be expected, the occasion, I hope, will be admitted as an apology if I venture to say that

- if a preference, upon principle, of a free republican government, formed upon long and serious reflection, after a diligent and impartial inquiry after truth;

- if an attachment to the Constitution of the United States, and a conscientious determination to support it until it shall be altered by the judgments and wishes of the people, expressed in the mode prescribed in it;

- if a respectful attention to the constitutions of the individual States and a constant caution and delicacy toward the State governments;

- if an equal and impartial regard to the rights, interest, honor, and happiness of all the States in the Union, without preference or regard to a northern or southern, an eastern or western, position, their various political opinions on unessential points or their personal attachments;

- if a love of virtuous men of all parties and denominations;

- if a love of science and letters and a wish to patronize every rational effort to encourage schools, colleges, universities, academies, and every institution for propagating knowledge, virtue, and religion among all classes of the people, not only for their benign influence on the happiness of life in all its stages and classes, and of society in all its forms, but as the only means of preserving our Constitution from its natural enemies, the spirit of sophistry, the spirit of party, the spirit of intrigue, the profligacy of corruption, and the pestilence of foreign influence, which is the angel of destruction to elective governments;

- if a love of equal laws, of justice, and humanity in the interior administration;

- if an inclination to improve agriculture, commerce, and manufacturers for necessity, convenience, and defense;

- if a spirit of equity and humanity toward the aboriginal nations of America, and a disposition to meliorate their condition by inclining them to be more friendly to us, and our citizens to be more friendly to them;

- if an inflexible determination to maintain peace and inviolable faith with all nations, and that system of neutrality and impartiality among the belligerent powers of Europe which has been adopted by this Government and so solemnly sanctioned by both Houses of Congress and applauded by the legislatures of the States and the public opinion, until it shall be otherwise ordained by Congress;

- if a personal esteem for the French nation, formed in a residence of seven years chiefly among them, and a sincere desire to preserve the friendship which has been so much for the honor and interest of both nations;

- if, while the conscious honor and integrity of the people of America and the internal sentiment of their own power and energies must be preserved, an earnest endeavor to investigate every just cause and remove every colorable pretense of complaint;

- if an intention to pursue by amicable negotiation a reparation for the injuries that have been committed on the commerce of our fellow-citizens by whatever nation, and if success can not be obtained, to lay the facts before the Legislature, that they may consider what further measures the honor and interest of the Government and its constituents demand;

- if a resolution to do justice as far as may depend upon me, at all times and to all nations, and maintain peace, friendship, and benevolence with all the world;

- if an unshaken confidence in the honor, spirit, and resources of the American people, on which I have so often hazarded my all and never been deceived;

- if elevated ideas of the high destinies of this country and of my own duties toward it, founded on a knowledge of the moral principles and intellectual improvements of the people deeply engraven on my mind in early life, and not obscured but exalted by experience and age;

and, with humble reverence, I feel it to be my duty to add, if a veneration for the religion of a people who profess and call themselves Christians, and a fixed resolution to consider a decent respect for Christianity among the best recommendations for the public service, can enable me in any degree to comply with your wishes, it shall be my strenuous endeavor that this sagacious injunction of the two Houses shall not be without effect.

With this great example before me, with the sense and spirit, the  faith and honor, the duty and interest, of the same American people pledged to support the Constitution of the United States, I entertain no doubt of its continuance in all its energy, and my mind is prepared without hesitation to lay myself under the most solemn obligations to support it to the utmost of my power.

And may that Being who is supreme over all, the Patron of Order, the Fountain of Justice, and the Protector in all ages of the world of virtuous liberty, continue His blessing upon this nation and its Government and give it all possible success and duration consistent with the ends of His providence.” - John Adams, First Inaugural

[I want the USA back]

What a son of a b!tch!

[VeniVidiVici]

I know I don’t trust the Democrat members of the court.

[Political Junkie Too]

So much for MSNBC's support for Article VI of the Constitution. Sure, they love the Supremacy Clause, but they have a problem with "...but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

-PJ

[Buckeye McFrog]

Catholic Justices will become the Hanging Chads of the 2010’s

[faithhopecharity]

Can we trust the secular-socialistic justices, then?

[redgolum]

With the Roberts court, I wouldn’t make a bet on anything.

But the government mouthpiece is making some interesting noises. Starts to sound a bit like a religious test of office.

[FlingWingFlyer]

I feel the same way about the Constitution-trampling, America-hating commie DemocRAT justices. Can we “trust” them?

[VerySadAmerican]

They believe in separation of church and state.

They believe the government should be able to force people to worship as the government dictates.

They believe all SC justices should be atheists or, at least, keep their mouths shut.

[brooklyn dave]

Roberts I dunno????????

[NCLaw441]

A couple of brief observations. 1) The First Amendment does not mention anything about personhood, individual or corporate. 2) If corporations cannot have a religion, how could a state, a city or the federal government?

[redleghunter]

If the previous “news coverage” of previous SCOTUS arguments give us a hint, then we should not be counting out chickens just yet for a Hobby Lobby victory. Remember when conservative commentators on Fox News were gushing over the grilling 6 SCOTUS justices gave the Obama SG when hearing arguments for the repeal of Obamacare? Ends up being turned on its head in the decision.

My observation is when a justice asks these piercing questions to put an attorney off guard or grill them, they usually have their minds up in favor for the side getting grilled and just do it to clear out the little remaining doubt they have in their minds.

At least the past few years that has been the norm.