​ 🏛️ ​Official Supreme Court nomination thread - Amy Coney Barrett (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

The problem is, IMO, that many Christians are more concerned with being Republicans than they are with being Christ followers.  

Thanks @AAABatteries For me, the question is defining the bolded. My hope and prayer is it's a lot more like "Some" Christians are more concerned...

That's how I see it among my Christian friends. But I also know some that do appear to put too much emphasis on politics. I know it's not especially satisfying, but I thought the article I posted earlier hits on this pretty well. https://relevantmagazine.com/current/what-is-the-christian-posture-for-the-upcoming-election/

And I do think we over complicate it sometimes. 

As Christians, if we believe scripture, Jesus told us pretty clearly what we're supposed to do. Love God. And just as importantly, love your neighbor. 

Matthew 22:36-40 NLT

Quote
36 “Teacher, which is the most important commandment in the law of Moses?”

37 Jesus replied, “‘You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 A second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments.”





 

 

 

[Joe Bryant]

And not to turn this into Sunday School, but there's a bit more that I think is super important. 

The story about Jesus being asked what's the most important commandment is one of those stories that's repeated in another book of the bible. The instance above is from Matthew. The book of Luke also recounts his version of the story. 

Luke 10:25-28 NLT

25 One day an expert in religious law stood up to test Jesus by asking him this question: “Teacher, what should I do to inherit eternal life?”

26 Jesus replied, “What does the law of Moses say? How do you read it?”

27 The man answered, “‘You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your strength, and all your mind.’ And, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”[c]

28 “Right!” Jesus told him. “Do this and you will live!”

Here's where it's important to us. When Jesus says "Love your neighbor", the obvious question is "Who is your neighbor?" And that's just what the guy asked Jesus. The next verse:

29 The man wanted to justify his actions, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

Jesus lots of times used an example to give an answer. He did that this time.

Luke 10:30-37 NLT

Parable of the Good Samaritan

30 Jesus replied with a story: “A Jewish man was traveling from Jerusalem down to Jericho, and he was attacked by bandits. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him up, and left him half dead beside the road.

31 “By chance a priest came along. But when he saw the man lying there, he crossed to the other side of the road and passed him by. 32 A Temple assistant[d] walked over and looked at him lying there, but he also passed by on the other side.

33 “Then a despised Samaritan came along, and when he saw the man, he felt compassion for him. 34 Going over to him, the Samaritan soothed his wounds with olive oil and wine and bandaged them. Then he put the man on his own donkey and took him to an inn, where he took care of him. 35 The next day he handed the innkeeper two silver coins,[e] telling him, ‘Take care of this man. If his bill runs higher than this, I’ll pay you the next time I’m here.’

36 “Now which of these three would you say was a neighbor to the man who was attacked by bandits?” Jesus asked.

37 The man replied, “The one who showed him mercy.”

Then Jesus said, “Yes, now go and do the same.”

It's important to know here that for a Jewish person, a Samaritan was not "on their team". For a Jewish person, a Samaritan was most definitely "the other". 

What Jesus was saying here is he wants his followers to love everyone. Not just the people who think like us, look like us, sound like us.

Jesus was saying in effect, "Everyone is your neighbor". Now he was not saying, "It's all good, everything goes." You can love someone and not agree with them. 

I know people tire of me being critical of the sniping and fighting here and much of that is I hate seeing us demean and not be cool to "the other". 

Sunday School over. Time for juice and graham crackers.  

 

[The Commish]

Jesus said, “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35)

If only we could get that one thing right.

How do people outside the faith view Christians? As dogmatic, unbending, closed minded, as hypocrites, as charlatans (equating certain televangelists with following Christ), as people who don’t know how to have fun, et al.

Its a complete perversion of what it means to love Jesus and be His follower. But tbh I’m not sure how we achieve altering how others view believers.

Through our actions...plain and simple.  And even then, that won't work for those who don't WANT to change how they view us.  The challenge in that is being able to go to bed every night and feeling confident that you've done the best you could, that day, to mirror Jesus' actions and teachings.  Reality is, we're probably going to fail a lot more than we succeed in that arena, but on the good days where we're doing it correctly people have no choice but to recognize "hey, there's something different about him/her".  That's where it starts.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

Through our actions...plain and simple.  And even then, that won't work for those who don't WANT to change how they view us.  The challenge in that is being able to go to bed every night and feeling confident that you've done the best you could, that day, to mirror Jesus' actions and teachings.  Reality is, we're probably going to fail a lot more than we succeed in that arena, but on the good days where we're doing it correctly people have no choice but to recognize "hey, there's something different about him/her".  That's where it starts.  

Thanks @The Commish

 

[Summer Wheat]

From what I have been told and learned in my life is that there is  a difference between Catholics and Christians.  The Catholics I know never really have talked about their faith very much.  The Christians I have known talked about it much more and actually tried to convert me, but they all associate and mingle.  The Jews and Muslims have never tried to convert me.

 

[sho nuff]

From what I have been told and learned in my life is that there is  a difference between Catholics and Christians.  The Catholics I know never really have talked about their faith very much.  The Christians I have known talked about it much more and actually tried to convert me.

Catholics are Christians

 

[Joe Bryant]

Agreed @sho nuff

The "are Catholics really Christians" is a thread that might be interesting for some to run down. It's not for me as it deflects from the bigger picture discussion on this which I think is important. @Summer Wheat Please start a new thread if you want on that but let's keep this one more on track. 

 

[H Jass]

Catholics are Christians

I gotta give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he meant Catholics and Protestants.  If he didn't then I'm unfortunately going to give him the BAM -> : rolleyes:

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Uh that’s not a “rabbit hole”, it’s slanderous.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Uh that’s not a “rabbit hole”, it’s slanderous.

Sigh. Agreed. But that's what I'm trying avoid here. I'll back out of it from here and you guys can take this one off the rails if you prefer.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Catholics are Christians

*allegedly

Spoiler

*I kid, I kid

 

[sho nuff]

*allegedly

Spoiler

*I kid, I kid

At least on Easter and Christmas. 

 

[Sinn Fein]

The "are Catholics really Christians" is a thread that might be interesting for some to run down.

WTF?

 

[BobbyLayne]

At least on Easter and Christmas. 

I have a couple nephews who teach at Jesuit schools and they turned my opinion on Catholics in general. Interestingly, a lot of the pastors in my (Pentecostal) church enjoy reading Catholic authors.

I grew up basically believing Catholics only existed to stoke the fires of hell. I evolved. 

 

[BobbyLayne]

WTF?

What’s their faith?

How much time you got?

 

[sho nuff]

I have a couple nephews who teach at Jesuit schools and they turned my opinion on Catholics in general. Interestingly, a lot of the pastors in my (Pentecostal) church enjoy reading Catholic authors.

I grew up basically believing Catholics only existed to stoke the fires of hell. I evolved. 

I grew up thinking everyone was Catholic or Lutheran (til I then realized my step mom and then my dad went to a Methodist Church).  Didn't really know Baptists existed til I moved to Tennessee as a 15 year old...and was questioned if I believed in Christ after I told someone i was Catholic.

Anyway...none of which has much to do with the thread.  Just a little sticking point I have when people try and separate Catholic and Christian.  Its like...who do people think we are referring to when we do the sign of the cross.  Some other Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?

 

[Joe Bryant]

What’s their faith?

How much time you got?

Christians can be some of the worst when it comes to fighting amongst themselves. Super discouraging. And why I said I have no interest in going down that path here. 

 

[BobbyLayne]

I grew up thinking everyone was Catholic or Lutheran (til I then realized my step mom and then my dad went to a Methodist Church).  Didn't really know Baptists existed til I moved to Tennessee as a 15 year old...and was questioned if I believed in Christ after I told someone i was Catholic.

Anyway...none of which has much to do with the thread.  Just a little sticking point I have when people try and separate Catholic and Christian.  Its like...who do people think we are referring to when we do the sign of the cross.  Some other Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?

True, we should hop off this rabbit trail. @Joe Bryant made mention of another thread discussion but I wasn’t able to find it.

I consider Catholics to be my brothers and sisters in Christ. Everyone back home in west Michigan (Reformed Church of America and Christian Reformed denominations are both HQed there) would sharply disagree.

I think it’s important to not major in minors. Would highly recommend the Netflix documentary American Gospel: Christ Alone.

 

[gianmarco]

In general, along with discussing politics, I dislike discussing religion even more.  I hate how married the two have become with one another.  And, while I might be mistaken, the biggest reason for that is the entire pro-life vs. pro-choice stance.  For many, many Christians, it's the single biggest issue that determines who they vote for.  And the reason I have such a big problem with it, even though I understand why they are choosing how they choose, is summed in in the following quote almost 20 years ago from a Benedictine Nun:

"I do not believe that just because you are opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, a child educated, a child housed. And why would I think that you don't? Because you don't want any tax money to go there. That's not pro-life. That's pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is."

For me, claiming to be pro-life/anti-abortion yet still endorsing policies that don't support families, education, and generally "pro-life" things for people who are actually living on the planet and in need is a hypocritical stance to take.  So when those politicians/lawmakers who are Christian are supporting policies such as separating families through deportation or denying healthcare to those who need it the most or any other number of things that generally don't jive with the true idea of "pro-life" are the ones that Christians are voting in, I similarly have a hard time believing they are truly following Christian ideals in being pro-life.  I find it to be the exact opposite.

ETA -- Here's a link to her quote and further comments on it

 

[Sinn Fein]

Seems normal:

AP report on People of Praise

The AP interviewed seven current and former members of People of Praise, and reviewed its tax records, websites, missionary blogs and back issues of its magazine to try to paint a fuller picture of an organization that Barrett has been deeply involved in since childhood.

***

The AP also reviewed 15 years of back issues of the organization’s internal magazine, Vine and Branches, which has published birth announcements, photos and other mentions of Barrett and her husband, Jesse, whose family has been active in the group for four decades. On Friday, all editions of the magazine were removed from the group’s website.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Seems normal:

AP report on People of Praise

The AP interviewed seven current and former members of People of Praise, and reviewed its tax records, websites, missionary blogs and back issues of its magazine to try to paint a fuller picture of an organization that Barrett has been deeply involved in since childhood.

***

The AP also reviewed 15 years of back issues of the organization’s internal magazine, Vine and Branches, which has published birth announcements, photos and other mentions of Barrett and her husband, Jesse, whose family has been active in the group for four decades. On Friday, all editions of the magazine were removed from the group’s website.

Maybe didn’t want to dox other members of People of Praise?



She’s a public figure, but if I belonged to them I could see being a little concerned about being targeted. Am I wrong?

It’s a pretty small sect, right? Like 7K members or so? 

 

[Sinn Fein]

Maybe - seems more like a non-traditional sect that does not want scrutiny that comes with a SC nominee being a member.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Maybe - seems more like a non-traditional sect that does not want scrutiny that comes with a SC nominee being a member.

Could be. They're definitely a bit different, I was unaware of their existence until she was a potential nominee.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Could be. They're definitely a bit different, I was unaware of their existence until she was a potential nominee.

A couple of things deserve further investigation - imo: How involved is she in the group?  And, how involved are the group into members lives?

A couple of things that sort of stood out to me - she has been around the group since childhood, and she moved to South Bend - where the group was formed.  That suggests a potential for indoctrination - without more.  Certainly going to Notre Dame is a good reason to move to South Bend - but it seems odd, given the connection to People of Praise.

 

[Summer Wheat]

A little puzzled at why ACB being Catholic is an issue. 

Joe Biden is Catholic and he might be the next POTUS.  Nancy Pelosi is Catholic, AOC is Catholic, Sonia Sotomayor is Catholic. Lots of Catholics in politics.

 

[BobbyLayne]

A little puzzled at why ACB being Catholic is an issue. 

Joe Biden is Catholic and he might be the next POTUS.  Nancy Pelosi is Catholic, AOC is Catholic, Sonia Sotomayor is Catholic. Lots of Catholics in politics.

I *think* the issue is with People of Praise not the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[BobbyLayne]

A couple of things deserve further investigation - imo: How involved is she in the group?  And, how involved are the group into members lives?

A couple of things that sort of stood out to me - she has been around the group since childhood, and she moved to South Bend - where the group was formed.  That suggests a potential for indoctrination - without more.  Certainly going to Notre Dame is a good reason to move to South Bend - but it seems odd, given the connection to People of Praise.

I’ve tried to learn more about then (preferably stuff written before ACB became a judge) and have come up empty. They’re minuscule it’s not even on anyone’s radar.

For instance, if you Googled my church or my pastor you find tons of material. We could have a dialogue. But with People of Praise I feel like everything I’ve read is looking through the handmaiden prism.

 

[The Z Machine]

I’ve tried to learn more about then (preferably stuff written before ACB became a judge) and have come up empty. They’re minuscule it’s not even on anyone’s radar.

For instance, if you Googled my church or my pastor you find tons of material. We could have a dialogue. But with People of Praise I feel like everything I’ve read is looking through the handmaiden prism.

I'ma ask my buddy whose family was in it back in the day.

 

[Trey]

Ted Cruz sitting there with ACB claiming you need 9 justices ASAP in order to rule on any election related cases is so audaciously ####ed up you almost have to admire it. 

 

[Psychopav]

I *think* the issue is with People of Praise not the Roman Catholic Church.

The charismatic movement in the Catholic Church is fairly widespread.  It's not a majority or anything but I venture to guess that every diocese has charismatic groups, Life in the Spirit seminars, healing masses, etc.  Not a big deal imo, or fringe.

 

[Psychopav]

A little puzzled at why ACB being Catholic is an issue. 

Joe Biden is Catholic and he might be the next POTUS.  Nancy Pelosi is Catholic, AOC is Catholic, Sonia Sotomayor is Catholic. Lots of Catholics in politics.

Catholics serving on the John Roberts Supreme Court(s):

John Roberts

Antonin Scalia

Anthony Kennedy

Clarence Thomas

Samuel Alito

Sonia Sotomayor

Brett Kavanaugh

-plus-

Neil Gorsuch (raised Catholic and matriculated at a Jesuit high school)

Staunch conservatives who universally laud the John Roberts Supreme Court(s): >crickets<

The issue is neither People of Praise or her Catholicism, it's the circumstances surrounding her nomination.

They made Kavanaugh the devil incarnate for some high school party antics.  Frankly, if this is all they are able to conjure up on her, they should make her chief justice. lol

 

[Sinn Fein]

The charismatic movement in the Catholic Church is fairly widespread.  It's not a majority or anything but I venture to guess that every diocese has charismatic groups, Life in the Spirit seminars, healing masses, etc.  Not a big deal imo, or fringe.

This group extends beyond a parish or diocese.  Its not Knights of Columbus.

The notion of women deferring to their husbands is a bit of a fringe movement, imo.

But, it remains to see how much influence she has over the group, or the group have over her.  Absent that, then I don't think its a big deal.

 

[Henry Ford]

There's an obvious (to me) difference between the following two questions:

1. Does capital punishment run afoul of the Eighth Amendment under a proper constitutional analysis?

2. Now that this defendant has been convicted by the jury, it is up to me to finally determine the appropriate sentence after weighing the various mitigating and aggravating circumstances -- should it be death or something else?

I don't know whether the second situation was the intended context for ACB's quotation above (and I'm aware it's now mooted by Hurst). But it is quite easy for me to imagine being able to put aside my personal views and decide issue #1 fairly while being unable to do so with issue #2.

I'm curious as to what circumstance you would be deciding #1 without considering whether a particular defendant will be put to death.

 

[Psychopav]

This group extends beyond a parish or diocese.  Its not Knights of Columbus.

The notion of women deferring to their husbands is a bit of a fringe movement, imo.

But, it remains to see how much influence she has over the group, or the group have over her.  Absent that, then I don't think its a big deal.

Or they are called to obey their husbands by Paul, and this teaching is consistent with every mainline protestant as well as Catholic teaching for the entire 20th century.  Sounds like sensationalistic pot-stirring to even report it as an issue, from where I stand.

The same passage calls for husbands to love their wives as Christ loves the Church (you may recall he was tortured and killed for the Church).  Most commentaries on the obedience aspect go on to cover the sacrificial aspect of the passage as well.  Nothing new or fringe here, other than the half-truth way it's reported, I expect.  I'd suggest that because of this universal teaching on this particular subject, the burden of proof is on the reporter to show how this is any different from how this is addressed on any given Sunday in any typical Christian church.

 

[Henry Ford]

Or they are called to obey their husbands by Paul, and this teaching is consistent with every mainline protestant as well as Catholic teaching for the entire 20th century.  Sounds like sensationalistic pot-stirring to even report it as an issue, from where I stand.

The same passage calls for husbands to love their wives as Christ loves the Church (you may recall he was tortured and killed for the Church).  Most commentaries on the obedience aspect go on to cover the sacrificial aspect of the passage as well.  Nothing new or fringe here, other than the half-truth way it's reported, I expect.  I'd suggest that because of this universal teaching on this particular subject, the burden of proof is on the reporter to show how this is any different from how this is addressed on any given Sunday in any typical Christian church.

Fortunately, ex-members did some of this work for them by previously detailing in exposes the alleged subjugation of women within that group.  

Like this book detailing one member's description of what she considers to have been escaping from a cult.
Or like this book from a Notre Dame philosophy professor who was part of the group.

Which are discussed in this article.

Which also details the life of some single women inside this religious institution:
 

The group’s magazine also offers insights into the group’s views on marriage, community and members’ finances. A 2007 issue discusses how the 17 single women who live together in a household, called the Sisterhood, had their paychecks direct deposited into a single bank account. One member said she had “no idea” what the amount of her paycheck was.

The pooled money was managed by one woman, who budgeted for everyone’s clothing and other expenses, including $36 weekly per person for food and basics like toilet paper. All women were expected to give 10% of their pay to People of Praise, another 1% to the South Bend branch and additional tithes to their churches.

There's also some discussion in the article of the covenant that's expected to be signed swearing to act always in accordance with the teachings of the church leaders.

 

[gianmarco]

Fortunately, ex-members did some of this work for them by previously detailing in exposes the alleged subjugation of women within that group.  

Like this book detailing one member's description of what she considers to have been escaping from a cult.

Which is discussed in this article.

Which also details the life of some single women inside this religious institution:
 

There's also some discussion in the article of the covenant that's expected to be signed swearing to act always in accordance with the teachings of the church leaders.

We should certainly rush through this vetting process.

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

The charismatic movement in the Catholic Church is fairly widespread.  It's not a majority or anything but I venture to guess that every diocese has charismatic groups, Life in the Spirit seminars, healing masses, etc.  Not a big deal imo, or fringe.

Never heard of it before Monday. Was wondering why there was a big uproar over "attacking" her because she is Catholic. I didn't actually see any attacks. But it makes a bit more sense now. The proactive defense of attacking her Catholicism was actually put out there to thwart the fact that she's part of this obscure group that has 1,700 members worldwide and teaches that "women are encouraged to provide food and childcare and run an effective household".

People of Praise Wiki site

I'm going to leave it at that. I am Catholic, but not religious, have never heard of them before, and some of their ideas do seem a bit misogynistic IMO. But I'm not a religious expert so I'll just bow out here. 

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Or they are called to obey their husbands by Paul, and this teaching is consistent with every mainline protestant as well as Catholic teaching for the entire 20th century.  Sounds like sensationalistic pot-stirring to even report it as an issue, from where I stand.

The same passage calls for husbands to love their wives as Christ loves the Church (you may recall he was tortured and killed for the Church).  Most commentaries on the obedience aspect go on to cover the sacrificial aspect of the passage as well.  Nothing new or fringe here, other than the half-truth way it's reported, I expect.  I'd suggest that because of this universal teaching on this particular subject, the burden of proof is on the reporter to show how this is any different from how this is addressed on any given Sunday in any typical Christian church.

So when it is time to decide a case does she use her knowledge of the law and make her best judgment even if that means disobeying her husband?  I don't think this was in doubt for any prior nominations that were women.  I don't think it should be in doubt for Barrett either except what you wrote suggests otherwise.

 

[Psychopav]

Never heard of it before Monday. Was wondering why there was a big uproar over "attacking" her because she is Catholic. I didn't actually see any attacks. But it makes a bit more sense now. The proactive defense of attacking her Catholicism was actually put out there to thwart the fact that she's part of this obscure group that has 1,700 members worldwide and teaches that "women are encouraged to provide food and childcare and run an effective household".

People of Praise Wiki site

I'm going to leave it at that. I am Catholic, but not religious, have never heard of them before, and some of their ideas do seem a bit misogynistic IMO. But I'm not a religious expert so I'll just bow out here. 

And for my part, I have not heard of the specific group "People of Praise", just speaking of the charismatic renewal in general.  I need to look into the links that Henry Ford provided above to learn more about this group.

 

[Psychopav]

So when it is time to decide a case does she use her knowledge of the law and make her best judgment even if that means disobeying her husband?  I don't think this was in doubt for any prior nominations that were women.  I don't think it should be in doubt for Barrett either except what you wrote suggests otherwise.

Why would her husband have any input whatsoever in her judgments as a federal judge?

 

[Sinn Fein]

Why would her husband have any input whatsoever in her judgments as a federal judge?

I think that is the question that should be explored.

 

[Sinn Fein]

In addition - the group have pretty strong feelings on same-sex marriage, and homosexuality.  So, I think her views on those subject should be explored - can she separate her religious beliefs from the legal analysis?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Why would her husband have any input whatsoever in her judgments as a federal judge?

Did you not just write that "they [wives] are called to obey their husbands"?  If her husband chooses to have input in a case is she to disobey him?   Would she disobey him? Would her job come before her faith?   These should be disrespectful questions to ask her, but when you start from position that she should obey her husband the can of worms is opened.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

In addition - the group have pretty strong feelings on same-sex marriage, and homosexuality.  So, I think her views on those subject should be explored - can she separate her religious beliefs from the legal analysis?

Yeah, but that just makes her like Scalia. 

 

[Psychopav]

Did you not just write that "they [wives] are called to obey their husbands"?  If her husband chooses to have input in a case is she to disobey him?   Would she disobey him? Would her job come before her faith?   These should be disrespectful questions to ask her, but when you start from position that she should obey her husband the can of worms is opened.

But that just makes her like Scalia.

 

[Stoneworker]

Case closed. Move along.

But when asked by then-Sen. Orrin Hatch in her 2017 confirmation hearings how she would respond to Democrats’ concerns about the impact of her faith on her judicial decisions, she replied: “Senator, I see no conflict between having a sincerely held faith and duties as a judge.”

“And were I confirmed as a judge, I would decide cases according to the rule of law from beginning to end,” she continued.

“In the rare circumstance that might ever arise – I can’t imagine one sitting here now – where I felt that I had some conscientious objection to the law, I would recuse,” she told Senator Hatch and his colleagues. “I would never impose my own personal convictions upon the law.”

 

[Sinn Fein]

But that just makes her like Scalia.

Scalia never obeyed his husband...

 

[Sinn Fein]

Case closed. Move along.

But when asked by then-Sen. Orrin Hatch in her 2017 confirmation hearings how she would respond to Democrats’ concerns about the impact of her faith on her judicial decisions, she replied: “Senator, I see no conflict between having a sincerely held faith and duties as a judge.”

“And were I confirmed as a judge, I would decide cases according to the rule of law from beginning to end,” she continued.

“In the rare circumstance that might ever arise – I can’t imagine one sitting here now – where I felt that I had some conscientious objection to the law, I would recuse,” she told Senator Hatch and his colleagues. “I would never impose my own personal convictions upon the law.”

oh.  Ok then.  As long as she says so.

 

[dgreen]

oh.  Ok then.  As long as she says so.

Haven't people been saying the question needs to be asked? Is the idea to ask but not accept her answer? If so, why ask?

 

[The Z Machine]

I'ma ask my buddy whose family was in it back in the day.

Here's what buddy's wrote about People of Praise:

"My family left when I was like 4 so I don’t remember it, but I’ve heard enough to know it’s homophobic, it funnels money and power to the leaders, very misogynistic, and ####ed up the childhoods for a lot of kids from my town, especially gay kids."

Here's what a childhood friend of his wrote about People of Praise and ACB.  As you can read, this woman has a very close connection with People of Praise.

"In my opinion & from my personal experience of being raised in this cult-ish group (The People of Praise), Amy Coney Barrett is absolutely the wrong person to sit on the Supreme Court. She cannot be trusted to make rational decisions that will greatly affect Americans. She will always have the Lord, Jesus Christ & the "Heads" of the community on her right shoulder governing how she will vote.

From what I understand, her husband could actually say 11no11 or "yes" to Amy accepting the nomination, after prayer and after consulting his head ... and up the chain of heads of heads. Amy Coney Barrett in a commencement speech to Notre Dame law students: "If you can keep in mind that your fundamental purpose in life is not to be a lawyer, but to know, love and serve God, you truly will be a different kind of lawyer."

I was raised in the PoP (People of Praise), I attended Trinity School, and had to sit through talks on what was expected of me as a female in my community and my family was kicked out when I was in 8th grade because our family no longer conformed to the strict rules of the "heads". The majority of the people who claimed to love me & support me & my family turned their backs on us. We were truly shunned and made to feel less than. I had to unlearn a lot of confusing messages taught to me from this community, including, but not limited to, the fact that women should be subservient to men, that being gay will automatically land you in an actual fiery hell, and had to learn as an adult that people actually can stick with you and love you through hard times. There has been a lot of discussions about this amongst my friends & family this week if the PoP could be considered a cult or not & if Margaret Atwood indeed used the PoP as inspiration for The Handmaid's Tale.

I can say this from my experience, the PoP definitely holds its members in a constant state of brainwash, Amy Coney Barrett chose, as an adult, to be a part of this group and the strong Dogma that is a part of her very being will not be able to separate church and state.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein to Amy: "I think in your case, professor ... the dogma lives loudly within you, and that is of concern."

I canNOT believe that she, of all people, could be sitting in Ruth Bader Ginsberg's seat on the Supreme Court .... RBG, who changed the world for women! Amy will take us so far back in time. It is blowing my mind that this is happening."