Draft Alito opinion leaked overturning Roe

Why Republicans Are Smearing Everyone As Pedophiles Now

Not long ago, the notion that American politics was oriented around a dispute over the merits of child sexual exploitation was viewed as so loopy that not even Donald Trump could take it seriously. It is now becoming the Republican Party’s most energetic idea. The two most prominent theaters of partisan combat of the moment, the Ketanji Brown Jackson confirmation and Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law, have both seen a growing swath of conservatives embrace charges of pedophilia as their central theme.

Two years ago, the pedophilia charge was confined almost entirely to QAnon, a sprawling web of far-right conspiracy theories that operated around the fringes of conservative politics. And while some of the details produced by its theories would find their way into the minds of Trump and his inner circle (especially with conspiracy theories centering on the “stolen election”), the broader narrative that American politics was a fight over pedophilia remained marginal.

The pretext for injecting the theme into the Jackson hearings was that, as a judge, she supposedly failed to sentence child predators sufficiently punitively. This conveniently allowed Republicans to waft the allegation of pedophilia under cover of questioning her tough-on-crime qualifications. In four days of hearings, Dana Milbank found, “ the phrase ‘child porn’ (or ‘pornography’ or ‘pornographer’) was mentioned 165 times,” along with 142 mentions of “sex” or related terms like “sexual abuse” or “sex crimes.”

On the surface, the Republicans appear to be concerned simply about sentencing criminals. But at the same time, they can seed more absurd and heinous charges they don’t need to defend openly.

 

Pretty informative thread from a former PP escort who interacted with anti-abortion protesters. He relays some of their discussions

 

Yikes That was informative, but depressing. People who are so convinced that they are right that they don't believe they need to follow the rules anymore are kind of terrifying.

 

I am not going to read 50 pages, so this may have been mentioned, but this has happened before. In fact, in 1973, the original Roe decision was leaked to the press before the court had formally announced it.

 

When you have nothing to offer the American people, you resort to baseless smears.

 

Are you seriously comparing CRT to pedophilia? Really?

 

John MacArthur bringing the truth on abortion.

 

This is the wannabe-Taliban who believes that women should be put and kept in their place, and that our government should be overturned because Democracy, as well as religious freedom lead to Hell correct?

 

Opinion

Supreme Court’s hacks reward Republicans’ betrayal of democracy

By Dana Milbank
Columnist|
May 6, 2022 at 8:00 a.m. EDT

". . . . There is indeed a toxic spectacle and a betrayal going on here, but it isn’t the leak. It’s the betrayal of democracy by McConnell’s Republicans and the toxic spectacle of the Roberts court aiding it."

"The reported 5-to-4 split on the draft shows that this cataclysmic ruling would be forced on the public by the narrowest possible majority. This means the ruling is possible only because of the seat on the court McConnell and his Republican colleagues effectively stole by refusing for 293 days to confirm — or even consider — President Barack Obama’s duly nominated candidate Merrick Garland."

"Republicans handed that seat in 2017 to Neil Gorsuch — in the process going “nuclear” and eliminating the filibuster so that only Republican votes were needed for confirmation."

"Then, in a feat of astounding hypocrisy, McConnell’s Republicans reversed their pious claim that Supreme Court vacancies late in a presidency should be left to the “next president” and confirmed Amy Coney Barrett eight days before Joe Biden was elected president — essentially stealing a second seat. . . ."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/06/supreme-court-hacks-betray-democracy/

 

To put it simply, failure to submit to the authority of Christ is to declare war against heaven. The Father has chosen Jesus to rule and reign forever, and His kingdom will eventually overthrow and replace every earthly kingdom that has ever been. At the foot of the cross Jesus was mocked as "King of the Jews." That same mockery we saw at the foot of the cross happens today. People still today mock the idea that Jesus is King, and all men everywhere must submit to the authority of the King of all creation. Every person must choose whether they will serve Christ, or if they will declare war on His rule and reign. Right now, a lot of people are choosing war against God's anointed one. And they are really proud of their war against heaven and God's anointed one.

I am not going around enslaving every person who chooses not to submit to rule and reign of Christ. I am not going around using violence to force people to obey Jesus. My response is a mixture of emotions. I am amazed at the madness of rebelling against God and His anointed. When God goes to war He doesn't lose.

There are some people who are so mad and so hardened that this is their end: that they are to face the eternal wrath of God. I really want to reach through the screen and shake some of you by the shoulders and ask, "DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO YOU IF YOU DON'T REPENT? DON'T BE A FOOL. TURN TO CHRIST TO HAVE YOUR SINS BLOTTED OUT."

 

No, you are advocating using the state to do your dirty work for you. If somebody doesn't agree with you on a metaphysical issue, such as when life begins, you are advocating people with guns from the state take them into custody and lock them behind bars protected by other people with guns. You are not simply explaining to them why their actions are immoral. You are choosing to use the threat of violence from the state to enforce your interpretation of religious doctrine.

 

The state exists for purpose of person-to-person justice. When it comes to things like idolatry, covetousness, lust, etc I am not advocating any state force because those sins are committed against God and God alone. God will deal with those things.

The state exists to handle person-to-person justice issues and abortion is exactly that. Abortion is the powerful exercising dominance over the weak in the same way a predator dominates and imposes its will on its prey. The government exists to wield the sword against evil people who choose to dominate and impose their will on innocent people.

 

Again, how would this not apply to somebody refusing to give their kidney to a person needing one? You have the powerful person (who has two functioning kidneys) "dominating and imposing its will" on its "prey" to use your language. The only reason you wouldn't say that is, to use your words, the bible doesn't mention kidney transplants, and you choose not to interpret passages in the same way that you do abortion (also not condemned specifically by the Bible, but rather by your interpretation of biblical passages). But that is a cop out, and I suspect strongly that you know it.

 

I can say with complete certainty that I am not on your side. If that means war, so be it. But it's not war with Christians or Christianity. There are numerous Christians who don't believe in your version of the religion. But I am certainly at war with your version of Christianity. I will not let that cancer destroy this country.

 

It is a bad analogy because the mother does nothing and goes about living her life in a normal way and she has a healthy baby (assuming no complications). The person with two kidneys does nothing and the person with kidney failure dies. Nature dominates the person dying of kidney failure.

When babies are aborted they are burned alive in salene solution, or they have their brains sucked out of their skulls with a powerful vacuum, or they are dismembered limb by limb, or they have their food supply cut off and they are starved to death. All of these are premeditated actions and services that the mother pays someone to do. So the mother is literally hiring a hit man to kill a person she does not want to exist in an absolutely brutal horrific fashion. That is not the same as having a kidney and not donating it, although a loving compassionate person would probably give up their kidney to save a life.

 

Again, you are trying to cover for a lack of position with inflammatory language and framing. However, the basic point you appear to be making appears to be that standing by and letting somebody die that you could easily save is not as serious of a crime against the dying person? Is that accurate?

 

No need for you to think that you need to use violence to force people to obey Jesus when you can use government to force people to obey what YOU think Jesus advocated. You have a right to your religious beliefs. WE have a right to disregard them in general, and specifically, to disregard them when deciding governmental policy. Your religion is NOT the law of the land, and it's not going to be.