Amy Coney Barrett, the supreme court nominee, was a member of a “right to life” organization in 2016 that promoted a local South Bend, Indiana, crisis pregnancy center, a clinic that has been criticised for misleading vulnerable women who were seeking abortions and pressuring them to keep their pregnancies.
Barrett, whose confirmation hearing before the Senate judiciary committee is set to begin on Monday, was a member of the University Faculty for Life at Notre Dame from 2010 to 2016. Online records show that the group began promoting South Bend’s Women’s Care Center in 2016 on its website, adding a link to the group under a section called “Pro-Life Links”.
The revelation adds to a growing body of evidence that Barrett, who has served as an appellate court judge since 2017, has advocated against abortion, abortion rights,
Catholic professor at Catholic university follows Catholic religious doctrine. Next you’ll be saying that the bloke in Rome in the white dress does the same…..
The thing about *good* judges is that they can set their personal beliefs aside and apply the law/constitution, but of course lefties can’t acknowledge that because they see the judiciary as a way of circumventing the law in favour their own causes.
Of course Biden claims to be a Catholic.
They probably wanted to show that the university group had supported WCC from 2010 but couldn’t. As it is, they’ve only managed to prove she left the group around the same time that the ‘questionable’ activity began. Presumably because she had left the university to take up a judicial appointment, but still, not much of a smoking gun.
Plus the evidence is “added a link on their website”. I’m sure she personally approved that.
If only the bloke in Rome did.
Imagine the Mouth of Sauron came waddling out in size 34, polkadotted, comically squeaky shoes:
Pregnant people deserve to access birth control, abortion and other reproductive services without shame or judgement
“Pregnant people” (paging JK Rowling) deserve to be able to kill their own children without judgement. Judgement should be reserved for IMPORTANT things, such as whether or not you made a transphobic joke on Twitter 10 years ago.
‘growing body of evidence,’ when seen in scientific reporting, is a flashing red light that what follows is bullshit.
Without bothering to read another stupid Guardian article, I conclude their writer is a clown. Like all the others.
. . . birth control, abortion and other reproductive services . . .
. . . rat poison, bear traps and other animal welfare products . . .
Fish, plankton, sea greens… protein from the sea!
I saw the other day that Saint Bader Ginsburg once said in an interview “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
What can she have meant?
Steve +1.
Once, out of the blue, a friend told me they’d had an abortion. I got the distinct impression they actually wanted me to judge them. Either they wanted me to say you did the right thing or they wanted me to say that was awful: both judgements. I felt it was a bit too late for either to make a difference so abstained, changed the subject back to what we were talking before. Now if she’d asked me before she went ahead with it i’d be far more likely to give an opinion.
Nancy Pelosi is another”practicing” Catholic.
Pregnant people deserve to access birth control
Isn’t that a bit too late?
HB – I think people want to be judged, on some fundamental level. Otherwise, our actions are meaningless.
Mohave Greenie said:
“Nancy Pelosi is another”practicing” Catholic.”
If she keeps practising for long enough, she might start to get the hang of it one day. Although from the recent photos of her, I’m not sure she’s got long enough.