LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY navytron89)

Well twistedchick provided more information than I can here about the next Justice nominee and other things take a read for yourselves.

I read this about constructionist views and specifical Alito's views which look to benfit drug dealers (machine guns are not illegal) and abortion.

 I rather have someone like J. Harvie Wilkinson III , who still has his flaws but it a lot saner choice for Justice and the least likely to sympathize with dominionist values, he appears to be more in the center of the political field.

It looks like Theocracy and the Constitution-in-Exile format that the Dominionists are looking for would become a done deal, if Alito gets his appointment to the bench.

The other thing is there were rumors that Alito has basically viewed that blogging is unprotected speech from the First Amendment rights and that not only can you be hit for libel, that you can be held accountable for what other people say on your blog. 

Where are the Founding Fathers when you need them? 

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY navytron89) WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush will nominate conservative U.S. appeals court judge Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to fill the seat of retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a congressional aide told Reuters.

Bush is to made the announcement at 8 a.m. (1:00 p.m. British time) at the White House.

Alito, 55, is considered a conservative in the mould of Justice Antonin Scalia. Alito is sometimes given the nickname "Scalito" -- a comparison to Scalia, who shares his Italian heritage as well as his reputation for conservatism and a strong intellect. He is a judge on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia.

As nominee, he would replace White House counsel Harriet Miers, who withdrew her name from consideration last week under withering attack from conservatives within Bush's own Republican Party.

A conservative choice was bound to trigger a fight from Senate Democrats who want to see O'Connor replaced by a moderate justice like her.

Republican Sen. Jon Cornyn of Texas praised the choice, calling Alito "man of outstanding character, who is deeply committed to public service."

But Cornyn, who had supported a conservative choice, cautioned any potential Democratic opposition that, "It is important that the confirmation process be completed in a timely manner free of obstructionist tactics."

Although O'Connor has said she will remain until her replacement is named, the high court is nearly a month into its new session.

Follow up from me:

Katie Curick from the Today show made the announcement of Alito and had almost slipped and called him a dominionist instead calling him a constructionist (ie. constructionist = dominionist who hides their religious identity really well).

Anyway this is the next threat from the dominionists, who makes Scalia look like a liberal in comparision.

This is the man who the masses should fear if he becomes a Justice.

He would  undo Roe v. Wade and has looked the other way during stateside clansdestine operations (FBI doing B&Es on private citizens without warrants) according to early reports.

Other controversies that he has been into will have to wait as I have to track down more on him.

So stay tuned ......

Per CNN and multiple other news-sources, Bush is withdrawing Harriet Miers' nomination for Supreme Court justice:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/27/miers.nominations/index.html

This is relevant to this community because--in large part--Miers may have been specifically selected because she was a dominionist rather than on her qualifications. The most infamous example of this link appears to be multiple reports that she was selected on specific information from Focus on the Family's leader James Dobson. Dobson refused to provide the info until threatened with a possible subpoena; more on this below.

Miers has links to other dominionist groups, as documented in this article (most of the evidence is in the responses), but I'll summarise the relevant info:

( links to dominionist groups, as noted by article above )

Interestingly, as more info on her links came out, the dominionist groups started backing away; Concerned Women for America was one of the few dominionist groups not to endorse her, and after a while Dobson started backpedaling. Most news sources are in fact reporting much of the reason she eventually lost the nomination was she wasn't enough of a hardline dominionist (as frightening as it sounds!).

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

From Tom Paine.com:

Bush Plays The Faith Card
Ralph G. Neas
October 13, 2005

Ralph G. Neas is president of People For the American Way.

With statements yesterday from influential evangelical leader James Dobson and the president himself, the hypocrisy over the role Harriet Miers’ religion is playing in her nomination continues.

During previous judicial confirmation debates, including the nomination of Chief Justice John Roberts, right-wing leaders insisted that any mention of a nominee’s faith—or even indirect implication that their faith might influence their judicial opinions—would be evidence of rank religious bigotry. But now, the White House and leaders of the religious right rallying around the beleaguered nomination of Harriet Miers continue to cite her religious beliefs and the church she attends as reasons to believe she will oppose abortion rights—and to bolster support for her among activists on the far right.( Read more... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

Article from Salon.com:

Rescuing Jesus
Bush & Co. have hijacked Jesus, using him as the poster child for their callous worldview. It's time to rescue Christ from his kidnappers.

By Alessandro Camon

Oct. 07, 2005 | Harriet Miers, should she be confirmed to the Supreme Court, will be the resident evangelical Christian. She shares her religious background with George W. Bush, whose claim to have chosen her based on "knowing her heart" has as much to do with the born-again faith he shares with her as with her long service in his inner circle. This choice might have left secular conservatives perplexed or downright dissatisfied, but is an obvious crowd-pleaser with the Christian right. Above all, it reflects the importance of Christianity for Bush, widely described as the most devout president in history.( Read more... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY matraia)

Miers Joins Dallas Church Breakaway Group

Anyone know about this church or the pastors involved?

Several people mentioned this on other forums, and Nagisa specifically called it here, but now it's official:

http://www.local6.com/news/5052104/detail.html

Roy Moore--known Christian Reconstructionist and golden-boy of the dominionist movement--has officially announced his candidacy for governor of Alabama.

( a brief history of Roy Moore's hanky-panky )

There is already discussion on multiple forums--one which I think needs to turn into an organised campaign--to specifically see which churches and dominionist groups (with 501(c)3 non-profit status, such as how AFA and Focus on the Family are organised) are endorsing Roy Moore over the next few months and start filing reports to the IRS and state tax authorities of illegal politicking to have the tax exempt status of those groups revoked. (As Roy Moore is pretty much adored over and advocated/cheerleadered on by almost every dominionist group in the country--including a few specifically set up for the cheerleading of this idiot--it's possible that *most* dominionist groups could end up losing their tax exempt status if groups work in an organised fashion to monitor and report.)

EDIT: A fairly full history of Moore's misbehaviour is here.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY gleef)

According to our President, his most recent Supreme Court appointment, Harriet Miers is associated with Exodus Ministries, an organizing body for an number of Dominionist "Ex-Gay" groups.

Harriet has also earned a reputation for her deep compassion and abiding sense of duty. In Texas, she made it her mission to support better legal representation for the poor and under-served. As president of the Dallas Bar, she called on her fellow lawyers to volunteer and staff free neighborhood clinics. She led by example. She put in long hours of pro bono work. Harriet Miers has given generously of her time and talent by serving as a leader with more than a dozen community groups and charities, including the Young Women's Christian Association, Child Care Dallas, Goodwill Industries, Exodus Ministries, Meals on Wheels and the Legal Aid Society. [emphasis added]
    --From the official transcript of the nomination speech on the Whitehouse's website

Can anyone find more detail on this connection?

(Thanks to pooperman for noticing this.)

Update: Apparently the group she's associated with is actually Exodus Ministries, a religious group working with ex-convicts (thank you helenangel). The group still troubles me, and I am still interested in details.

Update 2: According to Slate, Miers has been an active member of Valley View Christian Church, a non-denominational 1,500 seat megachurch in Dallas, for 25 years. How can we tell if VVCC is an Assembly of God church, or other dominionist bent?

Also, according to the same article, James Dobson and Focus on the Family have already endorsed Miers. I find Focus on the Family to be very reliable at endorsing positions and people I disagree with.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY divabel)

http://www.suntimes.com/output/hunter/cst-ftr-scribble14.html
September 14, 2005
BY S. JENNIFER HUNTER

( ... )
So why, you might ask, did the Ontario government, that politically correct legislature, consider a proposal to accept Sharia law? It cited the cause of multiculturalism.

In 1991, the Ontario government passed the Ontario Arbitration Act, which allowed Jews and Christians to take civil and marital cases before religious arbitration. Rabbis could then adjudicate fights over inheritances and priests over disputes between parishes. Muslim groups in Ontario, quite understandably, wanted the same rights.

Ontario had thus backed itself into a corner. It was forced to either undo the Arbitration Act or give Muslims the same latitude as Jewish and Christian mediators. In fact, the discussion about including Sharia law brought protests from Orthodox Jewish women who claimed the Arbitration Act took away some of their rights. ( ... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY enkinhou)

Hey, everyone!

I was perusing through the archives of this community, and I've seen very little in the ways of John Roberts (not that the other topics covered, such as the Dominionist takeover of the military as well as the Dominionists praising such an awful disaster as Hurricane Katrina as God's retribution against the various sins of America and its citizens, are any less important than the issues concerning John Roberts). I have a small cache of John Roberts articles that may apply to this community, especially with the John Roberts hearings going on right now and the potential for this person, who is comfortably among the Dominionist ilk, to become the next Chief Justice of the Supreme Court:

Roberts Resisted Women's Rights

Top Court Nominee's Memos Questioned Right to Privacy

The Record of John G. Roberts, Jr.: A Preliminary Report

(PDF File) Final Pre-hearing Report in Opposition to the Confirmation of John Roberts to the United States Supreme Court

Documents Show Roberts' Influence in Reagan Era

However, the most disturbing thing in all of this is that, up until now, except for these few pockets of resistance, much of the media either is acquiescing (or outright heaping praises) to John Roberts' confirmation or just not caring at all, which is utterly sickening. I mean, though there were and still are Justices among the Dominionist camp (deceased Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Clarence Thomas come to mind), from the portrait painted by these articles, John Roberts, who is 50 now, was verily a Dominionist zealot since his 20s at the very latest. Plus, since the average life span is in the 70s, his confirmation as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court would mean that he may very well have heavy influence in the Supreme Court for 20+ years, which is something everyone should be really wary of.

I hope that this post has been informational to you, as all of the posts to this community have been to me.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY scarcrest)

Contempt: How the Right Is Wronging American Justice by Catherine Crier. She's written a piece today at the Huffington Post explaining her reasons for writing the book, and how it's becoming ever more important that we confront the radical right's attempts to toss out American legal tradition in exchange for biblical law.

Figured the people here would be interested in hearing about the book. It's good to see someone in a national media role recognizing this threat for what it is and identifying it as such.

Not only are dominionists pushing for "moral objection" clauses in healthcare (they claim for people with objections to abortion, but increasingly used to prevent distribution of birth control; some states' statutes are so broadly worded as to quite literally allow doctors, nurses, and pharmacists to refuse *any* medical treatment to someone for reasons like being *gay*) but now they are going for the judiciary as well (to block off the one avenue that a lot of kids in dominionist households have to get abortions or women's healthcare or to even potentially escape from their abusive households):

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/04/national/04recuse.html

Tennessee (particularly Shelby County--notably also home of Love In Action/Refuge), Alabama (notably home of several dominionist groups, and which had a flat out Christian Reconstructionist as chief justice of the state Supreme Court before he was disbarred), and Pennsylvania (home of raving dominionist Michael Marcaivage and http://www.repentamerica.org (which has claimed, among other things, that Hurricane Katrina was divine retribution against New Orleans for having drag shows on Bourbon Street)) are states with reported problems of judges recusing themselves on parental notification cases.

At least one judge in Shelby County has reported she has received an increased workload due to the judges in that county recusing themselves, and reportedly in Alabama and Pennsylvania teens have had to go to other counties to find a judge even *willing* to hear their case.

If judicial recusals end up being accepted in Supreme Courts (reportedly a complaint is being filed against the judges in Shelby County) this could lead to dominionist judges recusing themselves from all *manner* of court decisions potentially unfriendly to dominionists :P

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY ordos45)

So I was here on the couch, flipping through the channels, when I found the 700 Club talking about their massive prayer offensive referred to as Operation Supreme Court Freedom.

The basic idea? Pray for God to 'remove judges from the Supreme Court quickly". The CBN link, in it's Pledge Points to the right makes a point of using the word "Retirement" rather than death after that last time Robertson prayed for the removal of justices...

http://www.cbn.com/special/supremecourt/prayerpledge.asp (CBN homepage, the pledge to pray against the Court)

http://www.patrobertson.com/PressReleases/supremecourt.asp (Pat's homepage, press release)

http://mediamatters.org/items/200501040010 (Media Matters)

http://prayeralert.org/alertarchives/alert-030704.html (The Capitol Hill Prayer Alert Foundation)

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

From the Toronto Star:

Rapture politics

HENRY A. GIROUX
SPECIAL TO THE STAR

"Unique among nations, America recognized the source of our character as being godly and eternal, not being civic and temporal. And because we have understood that our source is eternal, America has been different. We have no king but Jesus."

— John Ashcroft, former U.S. attorney general

Since the re-election of George W. Bush last November, religious fundamentalists have been in overdrive in their effort to define American politics through a reductive and fanatical moralism.

This kind of religious zealotry has a long tradition in American history, extending from the arrival of Puritanism in the 17th century to the current spread of Pentecostalism. This often ignored history, imbued with theocratic certainty and absolute moralism, has been powerful in providing religious justification to the likes of the Ku Klux Klan, the parlance of the Robber Barons, the patriarchal discourse of "family values," the National Association of Evangelicals' declared war on "the bias of aggressive secularism," and the current attack on a judiciary that is allegedly waging war on people of faith.

But American religious fundamentalism in its most recent incarnation extends far beyond the parameters of extremist sects or the isolated comments of radical Christian politicians, evangelical leaders and pundits; it is now operative in the highest reaches of government and "more radical and far-reaching than in the past," according to the conservative commentator Andrew Sullivan.

The fundamentalist tendencies of President Bush are now commonplace and can be seen in his official recognition of "Jesus Day" while governor of Texas, his ongoing faith-based initiatives and his endless use of religious references and imagery in his speeches.( Read more... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

From Mainstream Baptist comes this critique of the Supreme Court nominee John Roberts:

If the report from People for the American Way is reliable, then Roberts is clearly an advocate for the government to extend special privileges and endorsements of majoritarian religious expression.

Roberts was co-author of a brief in the landmark Lee v. Weisman decision that argued in favor of prayers at public high school graduations. He argued that graduates opposed to religious exercises were free to voluntarily skip participating in their graduation exercises. SCOTUS ruled against Roberts opinion in that decision.

Roberts has also argued that the "Lemon test" should be jettisoned. The "Lemon test" is the standard that SCOTUS set forth in the landmark "Lemon v. Kurtzman" decision that gave guidance on how government legislation on religion could be considered constitutional. The "Lemon test" says the government's action must have 1) a legitimate secular purpose, 2) it must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion, and 3) it must not result in an "excessive entanglement" of government and religion.

In my opinion, Roberts opinions demonstrate extreme insensitivity toward the rights of religious minorities. When the hubris that demands special privilege is coupled with the obsequity that grants it, it inevitably creates enough outrage at such injustice that the privileged become despised and the privileges are rejected.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY seshen)

Citing state law, a judge bars use of the Muslim holy book, but some say the move violates the Constitution.

As Muslim-Christian relations are under the spotlight around the world,US judges sometimes face a vexing question: Can witnesses raise their right hand and swear to tell the truth ... on the Koran?

The recent refusal by a Guilford County, N.C., judge to allow a Muslim woman to swear upon Islam's holy text before testifying is, in part, a new First Amendment challenge.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY britzkrieg)

solarbird has already published some notes on Bush's Supreme Court nominee, including the following:

Roberts argued, even though the case did not implicate Roe v. Wade, that "[w]e continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled... The Court's conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion... finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution."

Later stated in appeals court hearings, "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land.... There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent." However, this seems to apply to someone in a position not capable to overturn it...

Roberts co-authored two briefs arguing for an expanded role for religion in public schools. In one case, he co-authored a government amicus curiae brief before the Supreme Court, in which he argued that public high schools should be allowed to conduct religious ceremonies as part of a graduation program, a position rejected by the Supreme Court.

Discussion?

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=19151
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=19159
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=8103 (not quite dominionist but dominionist-friendly)
http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg200507130813.asp (not quite dominionist, but dominionist-friendly)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/822xcgvg.asp (not quite dominionist but dominionist-friendly)

Pretty much a veritable who's who of the dominionist groups have told Shrub they don't like Gonzales, not one little bit...apparently the argument is that he isn't a "good dominionist", in that he's voted occasionally for protecting reproductive rights and affirmative action (neither of which are terribly popular with dominionists for obvious reasons). They want a flat out dominionist/Christian Reconstructionist or nothing; in fact...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302188_pf.html
http://www.conservativeusa.org/hpstatement-roymoore-071305.htm (warning: dominionist)

...quite a few dominionist groups are even flat out calling for disbarred judge Roy Moore (yes, the Christian Reconstructionist idiot who does talks at "white citizen's councils", got himself disbarred by his fellow justices in what is possibly one of the two states of the union closest to being a dominionist theocracy *de facto* as is for being too much of a dominionist asshat even for *them*, and is the golden boy of the Christian Supremacists) to be nominated. And the dominionists are pretty damned determined to get what they want...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8443761/site/newsweek/

...even going so far as to state that not only are they going to go actively *against* him should he nominate Alberto Gonzales as a Supreme Court Justice candidate, but they're going to go after his little brother Jeb too:

"If the president is foolish enough to nominate Al Gonzales, what he
will find is a divided base that will take it out on candidates in
2006," said Manuel Miranda, who heads a coalition of conservative
groups called Third Branch Conference. A former legal counsel to Senate
Majority Leader Bill Frist, Miranda went on to threaten retribution
against First Brother, should he decide to run for president. "We're
not Republican patsies," he said. "Jeb Bush can go sell insurance."

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

From AlterNet: Even conservative Christian Republicans are alarmed at the triumphalism of the Dominionists.

The Wages of Intolerance
By Marci Hamilton, AlterNet

Posted on July 12, 2005, Printed on July 12, 2005
http://www.alternet.org/story/23468/

The immediate reaction to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's resignation was so strident from both sides that the President has asked everyone to tone it down. Senate leaders are also asking groups to be more cordial. The problem with silence, though, is that we need to know what agendas are out there, and one of the cardinal problems in American politics is that too many times religious political pressure happens behind closed doors.

Before the calls for civility, though, plenty of groups were able to show their hands in this emotional debate over who to choose to replace Justice O'Connor, a moderate Goldwater Republican. Litmus tests abound, with conservative evangelical Christians claiming an entitlement to have a Supreme Court appointee who reflects their singular religious values. In the end, the President simply cannot choose a Justice based on their religious criteria.( Read more... )

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY thedemonprist)

Here's a nice big festering crock of you-know-what, courtesy of the New York Times(registration required)

Ruling on Property Seizure Rallies Christian Groups ( Text of article inside )

Sorry, but I don't buy that classic "O NOZ ALL TEH CHURCHz0rZ R GOING BAI BAI" fearmongering. It's been my observations that developers go after prime farmland and older housing areas first, rather than attempt to mess with the can of worms that church property entails. And seeing as how my area is currently experiencing some serious growth, if anything, even the churches are getting into the development business and expanding their operations on fields that were once open plains. I know of at least two churches who have slated future buildings for such land sites.

( And now, the Revised Edition of Letter To My Pastor... )

I'm going to print and mail this sucker out sometime Monday, but before I do, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on it (i.e., does it say what it should say, or does it need some more editing before I mail it out?).