[Vision2020] Sotomayor: US Supreme Court's Sixth Catholic?

[lfalen]

Joe
I have no major disagreement with your statement. But as a judge it is your place to uphold the law not write it, irrespective of your personal view.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: Joe Campbell philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 11:47:06 -0700
To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Sotomayor: US Supreme Court's Sixth Catholic?

> If you are in favor of laws, like anti-abortion laws, which restrict  
> the choices of others AND your beliefs about the issue are based on  
> your own personal religious views, then you are in favor of  
> restricting the actions of others who have different religious views  
> than your own. Sorry but that is anti-freedom, pure and simple.
> 
> That was my point.
> 
> Joe Campbell
> 
> On Jun 5, 2009, at 9:29 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
> 
> > Joe
> > I don't know what you are implying here. I am quite willing to  
> > except everyone's religion. I don't care whether they are Catholic,  
> > Methodist, Moslem, Hindu, you name it or Atheist. As long as they  
> > don't force their belief's on other or kill people, what ever they  
> > believe is fine with me. On the court though Justice is supposed to  
> > be blind. Justices should not interject ther beliefs into  
> > decisions.They should rule only on the facts, the constitution  and  
> > the law.
> > Roger
> > -----Original message-----
> > From: Joe Campbell philosopher.joe at gmail.com
> > Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 02:19:21 -0700
> > To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Sotomayor: US Supreme Court's Sixth  
> > Catholic?
> >
> >> Roger,
> >>
> >> You can be pro-life and also pro-choice. The issue is whether or not
> >> you are truely in favor of freedom of religion and thought and
> >> practice and are willing to accept that some folks don't share your
> >> narrow world view. Why not let them decide for themselves.
> >>
> >> Joe Campbell
> >>
> >> On Jun 4, 2009, at 10:44 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I do not think that her views on abortion are well known. If turns
> >>> out that she is pro-life, I lot of you with the possible exception
> >>> of Keely will be less enthused with her appointment. It would be
> >>> ironic if she turned out to be the reverse of Souter on the abortion
> >>> issue.
> >>> Roger
> >>> -----Original message-----
> >>> From: Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
> >>> Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 01:41:37 -0700
> >>> To: Moscow Vision 2020 vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>> Subject: [Vision2020] Sotomayor: US Supreme Court's Sixth Catholic?
> >>>
> >>>> Gender, racial or ethnic background may or may not be important in
> >>>> a choice
> >>>> for a US Supreme Court justice, but it seems religious background
> >>>> is not a
> >>>> major focus in the case of Sotomayor's nomination.
> >>>>
> >>>> And why is this issue not on the front page?  If she were Muslim,
> >>>> Hindu or
> >>>> Atheist, the full force of the religious bias in the US body
> >>>> politic towards
> >>>> a challenge to the Christian/Judaism monopoly on US politics  
> >>>> would be
> >>>> revealed, despite the claim of the religious right that
> >>>> Christianity is
> >>>> being marginalized in government.  Religion is a dominant influence
> >>>> on
> >>>> ideology that should be open to full critical rational fact based
> >>>> discussion, as well as gender, racial or ethnic background.
> >>>>
> >>>> Article on Sotomayor's Catholic background:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/31/us/politics/31catholics.html?ref=global-home
> >>>> -------------------
> >>>> Why is there not a single US Senator who declares themselves of
> >>>> another
> >>>> religious background than Christian or Jewish, of one variety or
> >>>> another?
> >>>> There are two US Senators who are "unspecified."  Now there's a
> >>>> faith for
> >>>> you!
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.adherents.com/adh_congress.html#109
> >>>>
> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Affiliation_in_the_United_States_Senate
> >>>>
> >>>>> From website above:
> >>>>
> >>>> According to the data, no Senator falls under the category "No
> >>>> Religion/Atheist/Agnostic" - a category embodied by 15.0% of the  
> >>>> U.S.
> >>>> population according to the 2001 Census.
> >>>> -------------------
> >>>> Religion is the most pervasive form of prejudice against a  
> >>>> political
> >>>> position (and despite what some might wish otherwise, US Supreme
> >>>> Court
> >>>> justice nominations are very political in nature) in US politics,
> >>>> in the US
> >>>> Senate or the presidency.  More than gender, race or ethnicity.
> >>>>
> >>>> No politician running for the US Senate or the presidency would
> >>>> stand a
> >>>> chance if they openly declared themselves Atheist.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ted Moffett
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> =======================================================
> >>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >>>              http://www.fsr.net
> >>>         mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>> =======================================================