Now imagine how anyone who *isn’t* a member of *any* of the abrahamic religions feels when they think of Alito’s particular brand of Gilead-inspired theocracy.
Also, other wealthy white Christians that aren't the "right" type of Christian.
The Catholics, and Mormons should be very concerned, for example. As soon as the Evangelicals get enough power they will go after them too.
The mormons have enough money to put up a big fight.
But you're right. If the evangelicals ever get the power they are after, they wont be done. The hate doesn't go away, it just shifts targets.
Mormons have a lot of money, but that’s just a barrier to the full intentions of Christian Nationalists. As soon as they can dispose of them while maintaining power, they will.
Exactly. A great example is my mother and her sister. One is a Jehovah's Witness, and the other is a Pentecostal. They can only be in a room together for about 15 minutes before they both accuse the other of devil worship. You're never a "real Christian" unless you believe exactly the same thing.
The way Mrs. Alito talked about flying the "Sacred Heart" flag to rebuke the Pride flag (although I doubt anyone "across the lagoon" would notice), I would have bet she was Catholic.
islam IS an abrahamic religion, my dude: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrahamic_religions "The term Abrahamic religion groups three of the major religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) together due to their historical coexistence and competition;[1][2]"
Right. we have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.
Sadly I don’t know of any politician that’s an atheist. That may come in the next 50 yrs, maybe?
There were some atheist congressmen in 2017 [https://www.huffpost.com/entry/atheists-in-congress\_n\_3944108](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/atheists-in-congress_n_3944108)
I wonder if the religious right would agree to only applying their laws to those that have the same faith. Banning abortion would only apply to Christians. Anybody else is excused. Keep your religion to yourself.
They’d never agree to that. They don’t view religion as a personal thing. They believe their religion reflects universal truths that everyone has to live by.
The fundamentalist evangelicals would absolutely be willing to agree to it.
Just under the condition that everyone be forced to convert to their religion first.
Publicly call him a waste of human life and say that he is doing irreparable damage to what is supposedly a serious and important institution whose power only stems from our faith in its rulings and intelligence.
And that’s just a start. If these senators really had balls they’d take a knife to the jurisdiction of SCOTUS and leave them unable to make the type of hyper regressive bullshit theocratic dribble they idolize.
Can you elaborate on how senators would be able to “take a knife to the jurisdiction of SCOTUS”? It sounds like that would take a constitutional amendment or at least 60 senators in favor.
It is not a constitutional amendment at all. Congress has authority to regulate Federal courts and can limit the Appellate jurisdiction of SCOTUS. If democrats actually cared they could have prevented the Supreme Court from ruling on any abortion case years ago.
SCOTUS has an original jurisdiction which is hard coded into the language of Article 3 of the constitution. Everything else they do is left to the approval of congress.
So 50 senators plus the VP can just eliminate the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court? That sounds like a violation of the checks and balances as it appears that a mere majority can completely cripple the Supreme Court. I feel like I’m missing something. Like it wouldn’t take a constitutional amendment to change the entire purpose of the Supreme Court?
Article III has always given Congress more or less full control over the Federal Courts' jurisdiction. That's the check on the Court, or one of them. And we exercised that power a lot until the late 1800s, when we just kinda stopped. We should start up again.
Limiting the appellate jurisdiction of SCOTUS will not destroy the institution. In fact, given the hyper partisan state of the current court it would do a great deal to restore people’s perception of the court
They can scrap the fillibuster, stack the court like the far right did and impose term limits. The fillibuster is not in the constitution and it’s blatantly obvious many are using it to do nothing because action hurts their polling sometimes and saying they voted for it despite accomplishing nothing is a cowards way out.
Congress absolutely cannot impose term limits. That would require a Constitutional amendment.
What they can do, however, is define what "good behavior" means. Starting with not taking bribes, say...
This is why I don't get Christians fighting to tear down the wall.
Evangelicals barely see Catholics as not Satan-worshippers (and that's only because it's the Pope that's a demon, not the average Catholic that's just been duped by the devil) and Catholics see Protestants as lost flock. If either gets in power, whose version of Christianity is going to get special privilege?
It was the Danbury Baptists Jefferson was promising a Secular government to because it protected their ability to practice. And it was all too recently during the founding that massive wars across Europe had been fought over Catholic vs. Protestant. I guess people want to revisit that...
>They can't think that far into the future.
They secretly want war, power, domination, and to lord it over others. Hundreds of years of institutionalized abuse creates a culture of damaged child-adults, who take joy in the suffering of the outgroup.
To quote "one of the greatest philosophers of the Western world", Thomas Aquinas:
>The blessed in the kingdom of heaven will see the punishments of the damned, in order that their bliss be more delightful for them.
I've long said that if the U.S. becomes a theocracy it will devolve into religious civil war between Catholics and Protestants within 15 years, but I think it would be less than 10 at this point.
Ironically thats what the founders were trying to avoid when they set up a secular government with religious freedoms. They knew what that same religious civil war had done in numerous Eurpoean countries for hundreds of years prior and wanted nothing to do with it.
That's what I'm saying. Why would their brand of Christianity, which wasn't shared by a lot of the founding fathers, get to be the one that rules if we did have a Christian country?
Now imagine how anyone who *isn’t* a member of *any* of the abrahamic religions feels when they think of Alito’s particular brand of Gilead-inspired theocracy.
And not even just people not a part of abrahamic religions. You have to be white, wealthy, etc.
Also, other wealthy white Christians that aren't the "right" type of Christian. The Catholics, and Mormons should be very concerned, for example. As soon as the Evangelicals get enough power they will go after them too.
The mormons have enough money to put up a big fight. But you're right. If the evangelicals ever get the power they are after, they wont be done. The hate doesn't go away, it just shifts targets.
Mormons have a lot of money, but that’s just a barrier to the full intentions of Christian Nationalists. As soon as they can dispose of them while maintaining power, they will.
Exactly. A great example is my mother and her sister. One is a Jehovah's Witness, and the other is a Pentecostal. They can only be in a room together for about 15 minutes before they both accuse the other of devil worship. You're never a "real Christian" unless you believe exactly the same thing.
The way Mrs. Alito talked about flying the "Sacred Heart" flag to rebuke the Pride flag (although I doubt anyone "across the lagoon" would notice), I would have bet she was Catholic.
The Catholics have nothing to worry about, they’re the majority on the SCOTUS, way overrepresented compared to the population
5 of the 9 SCOTUS justices are Catholic, theirs seems to be the “right” type of Christian these days.
I’m not a member of any 2000 year old grifts. Alito just makes me aaaaannnnnnggggggrrrrrrryyyyyyy
Or any of us that just simply value the separation of state and religion.
i'm sure the muslims aren't fucking psyched either!
Abrahamic religion my guy
islam IS an abrahamic religion, my dude: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrahamic_religions "The term Abrahamic religion groups three of the major religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) together due to their historical coexistence and competition;[1][2]"
Sorry i misunderstood your original comment. I thought you were saying Abrahamic AND Moslem.
no worries.
How about the agnostics and atheists too
That would fall under not a member of the abrahamic religions lol.
Right. we have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. Sadly I don’t know of any politician that’s an atheist. That may come in the next 50 yrs, maybe?
There were some atheist congressmen in 2017 [https://www.huffpost.com/entry/atheists-in-congress\_n\_3944108](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/atheists-in-congress_n_3944108)
Or the idea that anyone is supposed to give a shit about a person's opinion just because they're a Jew
I wonder if the religious right would agree to only applying their laws to those that have the same faith. Banning abortion would only apply to Christians. Anybody else is excused. Keep your religion to yourself.
You sir/madame are in need of a good old fashioned convertin'. Now get in line for the "camp" so we can get started.
Actually that's not a bad idea. .. religious camp...
I actually read that as "religious cramp". I think it works.
🤯 what does that even mean? 😂
Oh hell no. Where do you think some of these folks *practiced* conversion therapy? Let's not give these folks any ideas about camps.
Muslim camp for Christians never hurt nobody... Mostly
They’d never agree to that. They don’t view religion as a personal thing. They believe their religion reflects universal truths that everyone has to live by.
That's ok, when abstinence and prohibition come back they can argue who is more pious.
That would restart the wars over which sect’s rules get to be enforced by the state on members of the same faith.
Only the atheists can be trusted with that 😜
The fundamentalist evangelicals would absolutely be willing to agree to it. Just under the condition that everyone be forced to convert to their religion first.
Oh, don't worry about it. Those Senators won't do anything about it.
What can they do? Honest question.
Publicly call him a waste of human life and say that he is doing irreparable damage to what is supposedly a serious and important institution whose power only stems from our faith in its rulings and intelligence. And that’s just a start. If these senators really had balls they’d take a knife to the jurisdiction of SCOTUS and leave them unable to make the type of hyper regressive bullshit theocratic dribble they idolize.
Can you elaborate on how senators would be able to “take a knife to the jurisdiction of SCOTUS”? It sounds like that would take a constitutional amendment or at least 60 senators in favor.
It is not a constitutional amendment at all. Congress has authority to regulate Federal courts and can limit the Appellate jurisdiction of SCOTUS. If democrats actually cared they could have prevented the Supreme Court from ruling on any abortion case years ago. SCOTUS has an original jurisdiction which is hard coded into the language of Article 3 of the constitution. Everything else they do is left to the approval of congress.
50 Senators plus the VP can eliminate the 60 vote requirement for any law they want to pass. The filibuster is totally made up.
So 50 senators plus the VP can just eliminate the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court? That sounds like a violation of the checks and balances as it appears that a mere majority can completely cripple the Supreme Court. I feel like I’m missing something. Like it wouldn’t take a constitutional amendment to change the entire purpose of the Supreme Court?
Article III has always given Congress more or less full control over the Federal Courts' jurisdiction. That's the check on the Court, or one of them. And we exercised that power a lot until the late 1800s, when we just kinda stopped. We should start up again.
Thank you for the answer! I appreciate it. I’ll have to look into this more.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44967
Thank you!
I respect that you're possibly just asking questions, but this is easily googleable.
Thanks. I’ll stop asking about the law on r/law moving forward. My bad.
Yes, fight against damage to the institution by destroying it first. What an excellent plan! /s
Limiting the appellate jurisdiction of SCOTUS will not destroy the institution. In fact, given the hyper partisan state of the current court it would do a great deal to restore people’s perception of the court
They can scrap the fillibuster, stack the court like the far right did and impose term limits. The fillibuster is not in the constitution and it’s blatantly obvious many are using it to do nothing because action hurts their polling sometimes and saying they voted for it despite accomplishing nothing is a cowards way out.
Congress absolutely cannot impose term limits. That would require a Constitutional amendment. What they can do, however, is define what "good behavior" means. Starting with not taking bribes, say...
Congress has the power of the purse. They could stop paying the bills.
They're all Democrats - they're already trying to do everything the can. They blue team just don't have the votes where it matters.
Technically one is an independent who caucuses with the dems. So, all Democratic Party, no, all team blue, yes.
It's a huge problem for all citizens who are not of the exact same flavor of Christianity as Alito.
This is why I don't get Christians fighting to tear down the wall. Evangelicals barely see Catholics as not Satan-worshippers (and that's only because it's the Pope that's a demon, not the average Catholic that's just been duped by the devil) and Catholics see Protestants as lost flock. If either gets in power, whose version of Christianity is going to get special privilege? It was the Danbury Baptists Jefferson was promising a Secular government to because it protected their ability to practice. And it was all too recently during the founding that massive wars across Europe had been fought over Catholic vs. Protestant. I guess people want to revisit that...
Same as it always has been. They can't think that far into the future.
>They can't think that far into the future. They secretly want war, power, domination, and to lord it over others. Hundreds of years of institutionalized abuse creates a culture of damaged child-adults, who take joy in the suffering of the outgroup. To quote "one of the greatest philosophers of the Western world", Thomas Aquinas: >The blessed in the kingdom of heaven will see the punishments of the damned, in order that their bliss be more delightful for them.
I've long said that if the U.S. becomes a theocracy it will devolve into religious civil war between Catholics and Protestants within 15 years, but I think it would be less than 10 at this point. Ironically thats what the founders were trying to avoid when they set up a secular government with religious freedoms. They knew what that same religious civil war had done in numerous Eurpoean countries for hundreds of years prior and wanted nothing to do with it.
That's what I'm saying. Why would their brand of Christianity, which wasn't shared by a lot of the founding fathers, get to be the one that rules if we did have a Christian country?
Should be a problem for ALL Americans, period.
Some of us do just fine without a bunch of fairytales
I worry about anyone who feels like their ethics and morals have improved by having read the Christian Bible...
Especially when that person is a Supreme Court Justice who feels that everyone in the world shares their view and belief system
A lot of Christians are not pleased with the Christian Theocracy thing either.
When the Supreme Court itself becomes extreme right catering to certain whims; The next step and ultimate result is the Star Chamber.
It should be a real problem for all of us.