Posted on 02/08/2017 6:51:25 PM PST by FR_addict
Meet Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch's ultra-liberal church St. John's Episcopal Church is led by a pastor who proudly attended the anti-Trump Women's March in Denver the day after the President's inauguration Rev. Susan Springer has said she is pro-gay marriage and offers blessings to same-sex couples Another member of the clergy is outspoken about the need for gun control The church's Rev. Ted Howard also signed a letter slamming the 'disrespectful rhetoric' directed at Islam as Trump floated a ban on Muslim immigrants Church authorities also appear to be strongly in favor of environmental initiatives and added solar panels to the roof because of 'climate crisis' If Gorsuch is confirmed, he will renew the Supreme Court's Christian majority and join as the only non-Catholic member
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Where did you hear he may be a mason?
Some mega churches spend time doing activities with the children in their charge.
Your imagination may or may not be correct.
The only info on this is from a democrat senator. I’d like to see more info come out.
I would not be in that denomination unless it is aligned with the African prelates. And Gorsuch’s would not be.
Good point.
FWIW, Gorsuch was raised a Catholic but became an Episcopalian after meeting his British wife while studying at Oxford.
That should thrill the FR Catholics, throwing off the Catholic Church for the Church of England... for a wife. Sounds like something one of the Tudors might have done, now what was his name?
According to the late Illustrious Stanley F. Maxwell, 33°, Grand Commander Emeritus of the Supreme Council, Northern Masonic Jurisdiction, USA, President Gerry Ford was a 33° Mason twice over.
The liberals hated Anne Gorsuch.
When she served in the Colorado House, she was considered to be a member of the "House Crazies," a group of "conservative lawmakers intent on permanently changing government."
Reagan appointed her EPA Administrator shortly after his inauguration. The liberals were not pleased. According to the Wikipedia:
Gorsuch based her administration of the EPA on the New Federalism approach of downsizing federal agencies by delegating their functions and services to the individual states.[6] She believed that the EPA was over-regulating business and that the agency was too large and not cost-effective. During her 22 months as agency head, she cut the budget of the EPA by 22%, reduced the number of cases filed against polluters, relaxed Clean Air Act regulations, and facilitated the spraying of restricted-use pesticides. She cut the total number of agency employees, and hired staff from the industries they were supposed to be regulating.[4] Environmentalists contended that her policies were designed to placate polluters, and accused her of trying to dismantle the agency.[2]
Her son Neil would seem to have the right genes, at least.
Ole Henry Tudor was rough on wives, but he knew how to deal with the Pope.
If you are a ruler, and you find the current religion inconvenient, the best route is to found a new one. That way, your problem is solved. The People still have a religion, but you are its pope, er, Defender of the Faith.
Neil Gorsuch has only just been nominated for the court, but defended the federal judges that have become targets of Mr Trump’s ire.”
In addition, I find it ironic that Gorsuch, a judge, is coming out and publicly criticizing Trump for coming out and publicly criticizing judges. What is wrong with that picture?
Many conservatives lauded the pick of this man. However, like you said his church does not seem to be the kind of church a conservative would, or even should, embrace. So I am not questioning Trump, but rather his pick after learning more about him. I honestly do not believe he is the right man for the job.
As I also said, replacing U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, is a very hard task because they do not make many like him anymore, if they ever did in the first place. To me he stands out as one of the best this country has ever seen. A true gem. So Trump has a very hard job with this pick to be sure. But I think he needs to go back to the drawing board, as this man may not be the person he was really looking for after all.
BTW, we are only 4 days away from the anniversary of his death. A sad day indeed.
Except for the fact they seem to be against him as well. But we all really saw that coming after the Republicans refused, and rightly so, consideration of Merrick Garland. Since I see no Democrat standing up in strong support for him I'm not sure he is telling them something else. He may be a good choice, but I am sure having my doubts, and another person may be appropriate.
The problem is, picking these people is a crap shoot to be sure.
Reagan gave us: Sandra Day O'Connor, William Rehnquist, Anthony Kennedy, and of course, Antonin Scalia.
O'Connor & Kennedy were okay on some decisions, and absolutely horrible on others. Rehnquist had good decisions a majority of the time, but he still had some decisions that just didn't quite meet expectations. Scalia was rock solid 100% of the time. While you didn't like the vote, his reasoning made sense and was in line with the Constitution and after full consideration one came to realize it was the correct decision. As the opposite ruling would have opened the door for abuse with regards to other issues most did not even consider.
My point is that even Reagan couldn't always get it right. In the end it wasn't his fault, it was the fault of his pick. But as they say, hindsight is always better than foresight.
He DID??
And now they post on FR; scolding us Prots daily!
Cruz said he was a great pick. I think Trump picked him thinking he was a solid conservative. The man is not what Trump thought he was.
“Maybe Trump was given a list of stealth judges by some of the usual think tanks and know-it-alls.”
That’s what I think. Trump needs to correct this mistake.
We have one here in Asheville. It’s basically a homosexual church.
You don’t think he was thoroughly vetted? I care what church he goes to. Satanic? Really?
Why go to a church where you disagree with the leadership? Just a social gathering?
Twitter
I already did.
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.