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

[Joe Campbell]

Of course. Sotomajor's view, if I have it right, is that it is  
impossible to make decisions "irrespective of ones personal view." It  
is just a matter of degree. Again I don't know that I agree but it's  
an interesting idea.

Joe Campbell

On Jun 5, 2009, at 6:12 PM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:

> 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
>>>>> =======================================================