“Know that the Lord is God! It is he that made us.” [Ps 100:3]

If by God’s mercy I get to Heaven and also @Holy Cannoli makes it there, will @Holy Cannoli refuse to remain there because clearly he loathes me just because of the tent the LORD made for me to dwell in? And if he refuses for just this reason, isn’t his lot with those on the outside, the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, the murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars [cf Rev 21:8]?

To repeat Holy Cannoli's words.
" For heaven’s sake my dears, she’s replacing Ginsberg "
The choice is not in a vacuum. The decision must be weighed against the alternative if the current so called Democrats were to appoint someone.
I'm a little surprised at Gloria.TV short sightedness.
She appears to be Far from perfect but for Heaven sake it could be MUCH WORSE.
I hope your not planning a news brief on why the Earth is flat next.
Or how the Earth could be more round.

Joseph Sciambra on Amy Coney Barrett apologizes for use of phrase 'sexual preference':
ACB proves one thing - a pro-life Catholic can be confirmed to the SCOTUS, but if you dare to even slightly diverge from LGBT talking-points, you are in trouble - and you must apologize.
The issue of our age is not abortion - it's identity. Doesn't take as much courage to be pro-life as to question the LGBT doctrines; as a pro-lifer, you can march in parades, speak at conferences, and get book deals; I can testify - there are few opportunities in society (or the Church) on the other side of gay.

Chick Baldwin and Robert Barnes ought to know better and I believe they do but in order to seek headlines (on Lew Rockwell ) they make their injudicious comments. For heaven’s sake my dears, she’s replacing Ginsberg . How much worse could it be? These 2 are so full of BS that bulls wouldn’t even sniff.

Incidentally, there are leftist posters at Gloria.tv who have much too much time on their hands and they waste it each day making post after post after post (some lengthy) on various threads. They are to be pitied since we can be sure that their personal lives are so empty and devoid of meaningful content that they must get some kind of cheap satisfaction by seeing “their name in lights.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Judge Barrett’s clear clarifications and her fidelity to the law follow.

President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge Amy Coney Barrett, will tell the Senate Judiciary Committee on Oct. 12 that the Supreme Court shouldn’t try to make policy.
Her opening remarks presented her legal philosophy and will stress that she is a proponent of the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s legal theories. Barrett previously was a legal clerk for Scalia, who died in 2016.
“It was the content of Justice Scalia’s reasoning that shaped me. His judicial philosophy was straightforward: A judge must apply the law as written, not as the judge wishes it were. Sometimes that approach meant reaching results that he did not like,” Barrett writes.

“Courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life. The policy decisions and value judgments of government must be made by the political branches elected by and accountable to the People. The public should not expect courts to do so, and courts should not try.

@Gloria.TV News One of your best analyses and commentaries . God bless!

Both parties herd people and the Nation in the SAME direction.

Didn’t previously know about a majority Republican bench for pro abortion decisions! Wow!