While I think Amy Coney Barrett's religion is a poison pill

[misanthrope]

intended to create self-destruction for Democratic opposition, I think her religious views and the way they inform her secular life and judicial philosophy are indeed germane. The problem is how to broach that without making Christians defensive.

The opinion I saw expressed below could hold a key.

"All indications are that she has led an insulated and cloistered life in this cult, beginning with her raising by cultists and continuing with living in a cult house during college and law school. It does not appear she has traveled extensively, nor does it seem she has much life experience outside of the cult. I don't think someone with such cramped and narrow experiences would make a good Supreme. Her complete lack of trial experience representing clients also argues heavily against her suitability. I think someone sitting on the highest court in the land should have at least some kind of exposure to living and working among a variety of everyday people, people with different views and cultures. The more I read, the more I become convinced there is a concerted effort to hide pertinent details about her and that there are reasons for hiding them. Rigid ideologues are not what I want when it comes to SCOTUS material."

In short, it's not her religious views specifically Democratic senators should question, but more her insularity. Her "cramped and narrow experiences" and her "complete lack of trial experience representing clients" might be relatable for the standard GOP voter these days but they certainly don't lend themselves to a better-rounded view of the world.

Because the bottom line to her nomination is in the closing of the quoted opinion: "The more I read, the more I become convinced there is a concerted effort to hide pertinent details about her and that there are reasons for hiding them."

[Hekate]

1. In other words, a more intelligent Tulsi Gabbard, another proud cultist

Thank you

[catrose]

2. I question the judgment of a mother who takes her unmasked children to a party of 200 in a pandemic

Also how we can know whether someone on the federal bench for 3 years is ready for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.

[BComplex]

3. Excellent points.

Democrats are justified in doing whatever in the hell they need to do to stop this fiasco.

[pamdb]

4. cult

Personally, as someone who has NO use for religion and as a non christian, I would love to see a couple of atheists, or non believers, or secular humanists, or whatever you want to call them, on the SC. I know it won't happen in my lifetime, but I would love to see it

[misanthrope]

7. You and me both

but if you are a non-believer then you are sadly aware that atheists/agnostics are the most suspect group in American culture, according to polling. You are also acutely aware of the degree to which superstition permeates our society.

[frazzled]

5. Her "religion" should not be a poison pill

Many Roman Catholic politicians and citizens support Roe v Wade and Marriage Equality. It's her particular cultish beliefs that are the poison pill.

(Disclosure: I am NOT Catholic, not by a long shot).

[misanthrope]

6. While it "shouldn't" be, that doesn't change the reality that it is

We have seen the aggrieved paranoia stoked in Christians in the last decades and politicized by the American right wing. The ridiculous "War on Christmas" is perhaps the easiest example, when wishing someone "Happy Holidays" is grounds for victimhood.

[frazzled]

9. Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, John Kerry, and

Justice Sonia Sotomayor are all Catholics. Do you have problems with them?

It’s always dangerous to paint with a broad brush. It is called bias.

[misanthrope]

10. I think we're talking past each other

I didn't say I had problems with Pelosi and those you named.

What I intended in using the term "Christians" was to include more conservative Roman Catholics (like my in-laws) and Protestants (like my other relatives) both. There are plenty of hyper-sensitive and gullible folks in their numbers. Those are the people the GOP is hoping to activate should Democrats mention anything about Barrett's religion.

[frazzled]

11. And you missed my point as well

When you use the term “Christians” derogatorily, you are criticizing all Christians in general, not just the conservative ones you happen to know. You alienate all people who consider themselves to be Christians, many of whom are excellent people. No one knows what’s in your head.

It’s like going on a rant about “Blacks” in a negative way and then saying, “Oh, I only mean the gangbangers,” or “Jews,” but you only mean “the ones in the long coats and side locks.”
That is what bigots do, and I don’t think you are a bigot.

[BlueNProud]

8. Just ask her simple questions and make her either lie or display her extremism

Q: Judge Barret, you served as a "Handmaid" in the People of Praise group. Can you explain the purpose of a "Handmaid" and what your duties were?


Of course instead well get each Dem senator off on their own tangent, not coordinating with each other and spending way too much time bloviating and throwing niceties at her.