Amy Coney Barrett, a candidate for the Supreme Court seat, claims the Bible precedes the Constitution. (school, state)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Still waiting on the rape allegations. I expect somebody will come forward insisting that she tortured puppies as a hobby when they were kids together.
If the Republicans fail to replace RGB this year, Republican voters will punish every Republican senator responsible. They will be replaced in the primaries, every single one of them.
Oh, here we go with another leftist zealot trying to attack Trump and anything connected with him, so you are linking another left wing propaganda site.
In legal jargon the order of precedence means which document has greater weight. So if there are conflicts between the two documents, then the document with precedence controls the question.
However that isn't really the issue since she didn't actually use that word, at least from what the article says - it's just how the article describes it. However, if she views the Bible as being the controlling document to her legal decisions rather than the Constitution, that's a problem. Not because I am opposed to the Bible, but the job of Supreme Court justice is to support and interpret the Constitution, not the Bible or any other religious text.
I have read her words from her last confirmation, and the Bible does not drive her decisions. She was quite clear on this.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 19 days ago)
35,670 posts, read 18,045,481 times
Reputation: 50725
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbythegreat
Well, we knew the attacks would be coming, guess this is the best you guys could come up with.
At least you aren't inventing rape allegations this time.
You can't be serious. For a supreme court nominee, that is EXTREMELY troubling.
MUCH more troubling than fraternity boy naughty hijinks allegations, by far.
This is an issue that would make her absolutely unfit to serve as a Supreme Court Justice, if she values the teachings of the Bible over the US Constitution, that would be her job to interpret.
In legal jargon the order of precedence means which document has greater weight. So if there are conflicts between the two documents, then the document with precedence controls the question.
However that isn't really the issue since she didn't actually use that word, at least from what the article says - it's just how the article describes it. However, if she views the Bible as being the controlling document to her legal decisions rather than the Constitution, that's a problem. Not because I am opposed to the Bible, but the job of Supreme Court justice is to support and interpret the Constitution, not the Bible or any other religious text.
Thank you for clarifying the meaning of "precedes" in this context. I also agree with your last sentence.
For example, in the article she stated that abortion is always immoral. She certainly has a right to this opinion. However, the morality of abortion ought to be irrelevant to its legality. If she finds that the Constitution does not protect the right to abortion in any way, then she is free to vote to overturn Roe v Wade. But not for the reason that she or the Church find it immoral.
Figures the desperate left trots this out. Very predictable. I’m sure racist is next.
Get ready for democratic sky screaming.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.