Category Archives: supreme court

Needing 2-3 witnesses to make a rape alligation viable.

​What the serious F! Rhe whole email is shared below, but here’s the most disgusting bit:

One great perspective on these reprehensible tactics came from our own Bryan Fischer. He believes that, unless the biblical standard of two or three witnesses is met, an accusation should not be considered credible. I couldn’t agree more and think you will too.

Please send the American Family Association a message saying how disgusting they are!

American Family Association

Thursday, September 20, 2018

Dear Cathy,

If you’ve kept up with the news, you know that President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, has been accused of one incident of sexual misconduct dating back some 36 years ago. The accuser is a woman named Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.

We’ve seen this game played before. Clarence Thomas. Herman Cain. Roy Moore. Do these names sound familiar? In some shape or form, each of those men had charges of sexual misconduct lodged against them, during seasons of political rancor, when it was impossible to prove – or disprove – the charges. In some cases, the fallout negatively affected their careers. Each of them are rock-solid conservatives who love our country and respect the Constitution.

It is no surprise that the Democrats have resorted to the same tactic with Judge Brett Kavanaugh. This is all about one thing – stopping a judge who is a constitutionalist from being confirmed to the Supreme Court. The Democrats will do anything and everything to stop a Trump nominee, and they should be ashamed of themselves.

One great perspective on these reprehensible tactics came from our own Bryan Fischer. He believes that, unless the biblical standard of two or three witnesses is met, an accusation should not be considered credible. I couldn’t agree more and think you will too.

I urge you to read and share Bryan Fischer’s blog on this subject, “What Should Be Done About the Kavanaugh Nomination?

If our mission resonates with you, please consider supporting our work financially with a tax-deductible donation. The easiest way to do that is through online giving. It is easy to use, and most of all, it is secure.

Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association

P.S. If you’d like to contact your senator regarding this issue you may contact the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121

 


 

Share this Alert:

Facebook Twitter Google+ Email Addthis

Connect With Us:

FacebookTwitterInstagram

Unsubscribe  |  Update Profile  |  Full Version  |  Contact Us
Make a Donation

American Family Association
P O Drawer 2440  |  Tupelo, MS 38803  |  1-662-844-5036
Copyright ©2018 American Family Association. All Rights Reserved

REBUTTAL: Should Your Past Sins Disqualify You Today?

https://www.christianpost.com/voice/should-your-past-sins-disqualify-you-today-michael-brown.html

First, I want to lay out a couple facts.

1. The US Constitution has no rules for who can and cannot be a Supreme Court Justice. While Articles I and II have age and residency requirements for who can be a Senator, Representative, or President, there are no such rules for the SCOTUS. Article III

2. Thus, there are more than 250 million individuals 18 and over in the US with varying degrees of appropriateness to be a Supreme Court Justice. From the Census Bureau

While I agree that not all sins are equally damning, and I like Mr. Brown’s identification of 4 different scenarios of dealing with a shady past, his examples fairly suck and he approaches the problem from the position that Kavanaugh is the only choice available. Ultimately for Brown, it doe matter if Kavanaugh is lying because like Trump, he’s the lesser evil. People like Brown are afraid that a Democratic Wave in November will cause Trump to have to nominate a less Conservative Justice.

Brown comes across as ironically clueless when he keeps likening Kavanaugh to Obama. Remember those 4 scenarios?

  •  Own it always (it was never a secret)
  • Own it from the minute it was outed
  • Deny it even though all the evidence is against you
  • Keep offending because you were never in the wrong (even though everyone knows otherwise)

Obama has owned his past, even when it was outed. There was nothing to hide even if he wasn’t purchasing billboards. Kavanaugh “categorically denies” even as his accuser has a reputable occupation and therefore might be telling te truth (sarcasm; I believe her).

It’s also important to remember that in Brown’s world, all sins are equal. Attempted rape = marijuana smoking = alcoholism = consensual premarital sex. I’d assume rape and murder would also fit in that equation.

“Draining the Swamp”

Trump wants to put term limits on Congress. While this is a noble cause, I think it’ll ultimately need a Constitutional Amendment to make it stick (Executive Orders are ficklethings which the other party will always claim is Executive Overreach).

I think that a more productive way to make Congress work better would be to make the salary of ALL elected officials be based on the average salary of their constituency. So, if a Congressman, for instance, wants a pay raise, they have to increase the average salary of their district.

And, since I don’t feel like making another new post, I shall add a comment here on a slightly unrelated topic: the next Supreme Court Justice. I saw a news article which said that Sen. Lindsay Graham recommends that Trump look towards the Senate for his Supreme Court Justice pick and that Ted Cruz would be excellent. While I know that the rules for picking a Justice are relatively loose, I don’t think having and using a law degree either for prosecution or defense is enough to warrant the position. I think that you should have to serve as a lower judge, first, so that the Senate has actual judgments to base their decision on, not just a batch of cases that the person decided to work on. Judges should be non-partisan and should be able to make fair judgments regardless of their personal opinions based on the laws. Prosecutors and Defense attorneys are inherently biased and while that’s an okay start for a lower court, the people on the  highest court need to have a broad selection of judgments on their resume.