Ruth Bader Ginsburg passes

[KenJackson]

You do remember 2000?

What I remember is that every single count, and there were several, resulted in Bush winning. The Democrats wanted to keep recounting and recounting until the loser won. The Supreme Court said enough is enough already.

 

[Belk]

Are you saying that atheism is a religion? I agree that it is, but atheists have protested vehemently against that claim, so I'm interested to know if you really meant what you just implied.

The ACLU has waged war for years against public expression of faith in God. It's founder, Roger Baldwin, said _"Communism is the goal,"_ and communism is very atheistic.

But to your point, in questioning if the late justice has ever stated she's an atheist, I mentioned her work with ACLU as a reason to believe she would say she is.

The ACLU is in no way indictive of athesm. The defense of the constitution is secular and undertaken by those with faith and without.

 

[KenJackson]

The defense of the constitution is secular and undertaken by those with faith and without.

And you think the ACLU defends the Constitution when it attacks public expression of faith in God? Wow. Let me share what some others have said:

It would be unbecoming the representatives of this nation to assemble for the first time in this solemn temple without looking up to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe and imploring His blessing.
President John Adams

Without God, there could be no American form of Government, nor an American way of life. Recognition of the Supreme Being is the first -- the most basic -- expression of Americanism. Thus the Founding Fathers saw it, and thus, with God's help, it will continue to be.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Only fake tears.

Something tells me that you know this statement is false.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Are you saying that atheism is a religion? I agree that it is, but atheists have protested vehemently against that claim, so I'm interested to know if you really meant what you just implied.

Atheists protest because the idea is either nonsensical, with a strict definition of the word, or meaningless, with a colloquial definition of the word.

Which do you believe - the nonsensical or meaningless version?

 

[KenJackson]

Atheists protest because the idea is either nonsensical, with a strict definition of the word, or meaningless, with a colloquial definition of the word.

I suppose atheists would look at religion and see ritual, which is certainly a part of it. But a more crucial part is your understanding and beliefs about the supernatural. Atheists believe there is no supernatural, don't they? Well that's most definitely an understanding and belief about the supernatural, so it's their religion.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

If God chose our leaders, no nation would be a democracy. Only royalty is in the Bible. He gave us all the free will to choose a totally unqualified man who only cares about being a dictator, not serving the people who elected him.

The Bible says otherwise.

 

[GodLovesCats]

The Bible says otherwise.

The Bible says we all have free will. He would never choose a man like Donald Trump to be our President.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Atheists protest because the idea is either nonsensical, with a strict definition of the word, or meaningless, with a colloquial definition of the word.

Which do you believe - the nonsensical or meaningless version?

Which word are you talking about?

 

[Pommer]

I suppose atheists would look at religion and see ritual, which is certainly a part of it. But a more crucial part is your understanding and beliefs about the supernatural. Atheists believe there is no supernatural, don't they? Well that's most definitely an understanding and belief about the supernatural, so it's their religion.

Your views of, say, Odin, or Thor, might be akin to an atheist’s views of YHWH.

 

[Kentonio]

Interesting times. America was already a fire raging nearly out of control, and now a whole new can of gas has been thrown on it. The next few months could be make or break for your country. If the right genuinely believe they can stack the highest court and manipulate yet another election while a majority of the population are against them, I fear they are about to discover a long overdue reckoning is approaching.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Something tells me that you know this statement is false.

No, I don't think it false at all.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

The Bible says we all have free will. He would never choose a man like Donald Trump to be our President.

Read romans 13. It disagrees with you.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Read Romans 13. It disagrees with you.

1Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

The bold text is the exact opposite of Donald Trump: a greedy, fearful, prejudiced, unpatriotic, nasty, and dishonest tax evader, rapist, fraud, cheater, and deplorable man. If God chose our President we would be serving Hillary Clinton.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

No, I don't think it false at all.

Then you are delusional.

 

[JSRG]

Read romans 13. It disagrees with you.

As I believe John Chrysostom (4th century) correctly stated in his homily on the passage:

"For there is no power,” he says, “but of God.” What say you? It may be said; is every ruler then elected by God? This I do not say, he answers. Nor am I now speaking about individual rulers, but about the thing in itself. For that there should be rulers, and some rule and others be ruled, and that all things should not just be carried on in one confusion, the people swaying like waves in this direction and that; this, I say, is the work of God's wisdom. Hence he does not say, “for there is no ruler but of God;” but it is the thing he speaks of, and says, “there is no power but of God. And the powers that be, are ordained of God.”"

In other words, it is saying that the existence of governments--i.e. that there are those who were governed and those who are governors--was established by God. It does not mean that every individual ruler was specifically chosen by God (not any more than anything is specifically chosen by God, at least).

 

[FireDragon76]

I suppose atheists would look at religion and see ritual, which is certainly a part of it. But a more crucial part is your understanding and beliefs about the supernatural. Atheists believe there is no supernatural, don't they?

Most don't, but that's not part of the definition of atheism.

Well that's most definitely an understanding and belief about the supernatural, so it's their religion.

That's not in keeping with the standard definition for religion. There are plenty of religions that don't even believe there is something above nature in that manner.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Of course there will be a vote. It’s a vacancy that needs to be filled. Are you suggesting the vote will be tomorrow? Next week? Next year?

Well, he specifies Trump's nominee. So there are three possibilities:

1. The vote will be held before the election.

2. The vote will be held after the election under a lame-duck President and/or Senate who were specifically voted out of office (considering that the current argument is that the 2016 and 2018 elections gave them a mandate to appoint a justice, that would be supremely hypocritical once again).

3. McConnell is assuming that Trump will win the election and that Republicans will retain control of the Senate.

The only situation in which I would consider it acceptable to hold a vote on Trump's nominee would be scenario 3. If Trump does in fact win in November and the Republicans hold onto the Senate, then they will have been given a clear mandate.

 

[Belk]

And you think the ACLU defends the Constitution when it attacks public expression of faith in God? Wow. Let me share what some others have said:

No, I don't believe that which is why I did not say that. Perhaps you would care to respond to the things I did say?

 

[TheBear]

If the republicans pull the ultimate hypocrisy but lose in the election, I hope the democrats stack the court and gerrymander the maps to where the house will be blue for the next 100 years. Play with fire and get burned.

President Johnson? Is that you?