WWJD?

[ZNP]

Its interesting in 1973 when Roe vs Wade was passed, about 90% of U.S adults identified as Christian.

What do you mean when Roe vs Wade passed? This was a judicial ruling, not a law passed by congress.

What percent of Supreme Court justices identified as Evangelical Christian in 1973?

 

[Magenta]

Its interesting in 1973 when Roe vs Wade was passed, about 90% of U.S adults identified as Christian.

Back then there were probably more people who identified as Christians who were not born again...

Same goes for times even further back. It would have been dangerous at one time not to go to church, whether you believed or not.

 

[SaysWhat]

Back then there were probably more people who identified as Christians who were not born again...

Same goes for times even further back. It would have been dangerous at one time not to go to church, whether you believed or not.

Yeah those were some strange times indeed.

I've read an article about the first 180 years of the U.S. supreme court that was almost exclusively white male protestants. A bit bias imo.

 

[ZNP]

Yeah those were some strange times indeed.

I've read an article about the first 180 years of the U.S. supreme court that was almost exclusively white male protestants.

Oh, back when the voters were almost all exclusively white male protestants? Shocking.

 

[SaysWhat]

What do you mean when Roe vs Wade passed? This was a judicial ruling, not a law passed by congress.

What percent of Supreme Court justices identified as Evangelical Christian in 1973?

The U.S. Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade was passed on January 22, 1973. The judges ruled in favor of a womans right to abortion across the nation.

If 87% of the nations people identify as being Christian, probably wasn't far off among the judges either.

 

[ZNP]

The U.S. Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade was passed on January 22, 1973. The judges ruled in favor of a womans right to abortion across the nation.

If 87% of the nations people identify as being Christian, probably wasn't far off among the judges either.

So you have no idea. Got it. Nine people do not represent millions of people. They were not elected.

 

[SaysWhat]

Oh, back when the voters were almost all exclusively white male protestants? Shocking.

Which lead to disorder and mob rule mentality. You would had to have stake in the country like land owner or pay taxes to the government.

 

[SaysWhat]

So you have no idea. Got it. Nine people do not represent millions of people. They were not elected.

Instead of millions of people voting all the time on every day business, the judges are appointed to do it by the people you elect to govern the country. Don't like it there's always another country to move too.

Either way you look at it, for now the mob does rule the world.

 

[ZNP]

Instead of millions of people voting all the time on every day business, the judges are appointed to do it by the people you elect to govern the country. Don't like it there's always another country to move too.

Either way you look at it, for now the mob does rule the world.

I have no problem with the US constitution. However, misrepresenting the history and making it sound like Roe v Wade was a law passed rather than a ruling by a court of nine judges is deceitful.

There is no law in the US constitution legalizing abortion, that is what has been recently ruled by the Supreme court and it is the reason why for fifty years this issue would not go away. Trying to magically make a law appear where there is no law is deceitful and if there is no law then the Supreme court had no standing on which to rule. The ruling ranked as one of the three worst rulings in the history of the Supreme court.

Claiming the mob does rule the world now based on this ruling by the Supreme court is also deceitful. This ruling was proper based on the US constitution. The reason the Supreme court was finally forced to rule according to righteousness is because when you lie and have an unrighteous ruling there are consequences and they realized they would be sunk because of the consequences of that lie.

 

[ZNP]

If 87% of the nations people identify as being Christian, probably wasn't far off among the judges either.

7 judges voted for Roe v. Wade.

Of those three were Freemasons -- Stewart, Douglas and Marshall (
https://www.travelingtemplar.com/2017/09/justices-of-supreme-court-and.html)

One was a member of the occult organization "Skull and Bones" -- Stewart.

One was a Catholic -- Brennan.

So no, the judges were definitely not 87% Christian.

Approximately 0.3% of Americans are FreeMasons and yet 33% of the court was FreeMasons. Certainly not "representative".

 

[SaysWhat]

I have no problem with the US constitution. However, misrepresenting the history and making it sound like Roe v Wade was a law passed rather than a ruling by a court of nine judges is deceitful.

There is no law in the US constitution legalizing abortion, that is what has been recently ruled by the Supreme court and it is the reason why for fifty years this issue would not go away. Trying to magically make a law appear where there is no law is deceitful and if there is no law then the Supreme court had no standing on which to rule. The ruling ranked as one of the three worst rulings in the history of the Supreme court.

Claiming the mob does rule the world now based on this ruling by the Supreme court is also deceitful. This ruling was proper based on the US constitution. The reason the Supreme court was finally forced to rule according to righteousness is because when you lie and have an unrighteous ruling there are consequences and they realized they would be sunk because of the consequences of that lie.

I never said a passed law, it was a decision that passed 7 to 2 in the supreme court.

You used deceitful three times in place of your opinion interesting.

I never said a law or what the supreme court did effected the world. You misunderstood me for most of your statement. You should ask for clarification before clamoring deception.

 

[SaysWhat]

7 judges voted for Roe v. Wade.

Of those three were Freemasons -- Stewart, Douglas and Marshall (
https://www.travelingtemplar.com/2017/09/justices-of-supreme-court-and.html)

One was a member of the occult organization "Skull and Bones" -- Stewart.

One was a Catholic -- Brennan.

So no, the judges were definitely not 87% Christian.

Approximately 0.3% of Americans are FreeMasons and yet 33% of the court was FreeMasons. Certainly not "representative".

You better look at the dates in the link you posted. From what I see Marshall was supreme judge during 1973.

 

[ZNP]

I never said a passed law, it was a decision that passed 7 to 2 in the supreme court.

You used deceitful three times in place of your opinion interesting.

I never said a law or what the supreme court did effected the world. You misunderstood me for most of your statement. You should ask for clarification before clamoring deception.

The ruling of the Supreme court is referred to as a ruling, not "passed". If a law is "passed" we use that term. Many have tried to conflate the two indicating that the recent Supreme court ruling found the law unconstitutional. That is not what happened, what did happen was they found the court ruling to be unconstitutional because there was no law.

Trying to magically make a law appear is deceitful and that is what Blackmun did with his ruling. He tried to spin a constitutional protection of abortion into the US constitution where it did not exist.

You claimed that this ruling from the Supreme court was "mob rule" based on claims made on MSM. That is a deceitful claim. The ruling in Roe v. Wade was deceitful and opened the door for 50 states to each come up with restrictions to abortion which would then be appealed and wind up in the Supreme court. They realized that they would be swamped with these claims from both sides and that the real problem was that Roe v. Wade was a bad ruling. It was not mob rule, it was the constitution working the way it is supposed to and by definition that is the rule of law.

 

[ZNP]

You better look at the dates in the link you posted. From what I see Marshall was supreme judge during 1973.

What is your point?

 

[ResidentAlien]

Okay, here's the video. It's not very long, 1:47. It's Julie Green and Clay Clark. Clark launched the ReAwaken America Tour in 2021 with Michael Flynn who formerly served in the Trump administration. In the video, Clark says he envisions a time when the prophets will be over the president giving him counsel.

White Christian nationalist Nick Fuentes has said that if and when his America First cult takes power, all Jews and non-Christians will get the death penalty.

Sounds like these folks are pretty serious about governmental enforcement of their beliefs.

 

[Gideon300]

Okay, here's the video. It's not very long, 1:47. It's Julie Green and Clay Clark. Clark launched the ReAwaken America Tour in 2021 with Michael Flynn who formerly served in the Trump administration. In the video, Clark says he envisions a time when the prophets will be over the president giving him counsel.

White Christian nationalist Nick Fuentes has said that if and when his America First cult takes power, all Jews and non-Christians will get the death penalty.

Sounds like these folks are pretty serious about governmental enforcement of their beliefs.

Will not happen. I read the end of the book. The Antichrist will soon arise and all who not in the Lamb's book of Life will be deceived. Time to get ready, people.

 

[SaysWhat]

The ruling of the Supreme court is referred to as a ruling, not "passed". If a law is "passed" we use that term. Many have tried to conflate the two indicating that the recent Supreme court ruling found the law unconstitutional. That is not what happened, what did happen was they found the court ruling to be unconstitutional because there was no law.

Trying to magically make a law appear is deceitful and that is what Blackmun did with his ruling. He tried to spin a constitutional protection of abortion into the US constitution where it did not exist.

You claimed that this ruling from the Supreme court was "mob rule" based on claims made on MSM. That is a deceitful claim. The ruling in Roe v. Wade was deceitful and opened the door for 50 states to each come up with restrictions to abortion which would then be appealed and wind up in the Supreme court. They realized that they would be swamped with these claims from both sides and that the real problem was that Roe v. Wade was a bad ruling. It was not mob rule, it was the constitution working the way it is supposed to and by definition that is the rule of law.

You make up a ton stuff, yeah you are definitely deceitful and just flap at the mouth. I knew the moment you said mob rule claimed on MSM, you spew lies and have no idea what news outlet I may look at and that wasn't from MSM but just a general statement. Do you even know what mob rule means?.

 

[SaysWhat]

What is your point?

You make up stuff that's not true.

 

[SaysWhat]

You claimed that this ruling from the Supreme court was "mob rule" based on claims made on MSM. That is a deceitful claim.

Where was that?.

The mentioning of mob rule was in reference to white male protestants having a hold on the supreme court in it's first 180 years.

 

[ZNP]

Where was that?.

The mentioning of mob rule was in reference to white male protestants having a hold on the supreme court in it's first 180 years.

That is absurd, it is like complaining that the courts in China are all Chinese judges. If the country is 90% white protestants why wouldn't the judges be also? The Catholics came over from Ireland during the potato blight at the time of Queen Victoria, the Jews came to the US at the time of WW2, and most other immigration has taken place since WW2 when we became the major superpower on the planet.

The US was a country for 140 years before women got the vote. A supreme court justice needed a college degree, and years of experience on the court. So obviously it was a process that took years before you had a candidate like Ruth Bader Ginsburg who was capable of being a Supreme court justice.

That is an ugly term to describe the first 180 years of US governance.

The US was the world leader when it came to public school education. The reason women were unable to get jobs like Supreme court justice worldwide, not simply in the US was because of a lack of education. The reason for that was because of poverty. Even Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth were given rudimentary educations. The rulers knew they were going to be monarchs from a relatively young age, especially with Queen Elizabeth and yet they still only got rudimentary schooling from tutors.

The second reason is that women get pregnant. Only the very wealthy like the queen of England could afford Nannies to raise the children. Also many women died in childbirth. It was not until the industrial revolution that coal and petroleum began to do the work of men, once that happened we were rich enough to allow the luxury of people having white collar jobs. WW1 and WW2 established the US as a superpower with the reserve currency and that resulted in us having the highest standard of living on the planet.

This is a very ugly and slanderous accusation against the US. I wonder if you have been to other countries. I think one of the reasons for the ignorance in this country is a lack of travel.