Trump Nominates Amy Coney Barrett Over Howls of Rage from RBG Worshippers

Written by Laurie Higgins

Why do leftists, particularly women, worship the notorious Ruth Bader Ginsburg (RBG)? Why are even some Republicans waxing effusive about her?

Yes, it’s lovely that she had a deep friendship with her ideological foe Antonin Scalia, but is that really deserving of plaudits and fawning admiration. Have we come to a cultural place so degraded, so uncivil, so intolerant, so nasty and brutish that friendship between people of dissenting worldviews is oohed and aahed over like the discovery of beautiful bird long-assumed to be extinct?

Much weird ado has been made of RBG’s “deathbed wish” ostensibly “shared” with her granddaughter. To be clear, RBG dictated her deathbed wish to her 30-year-old leftist attorney granddaughter several days prior to her death. American legal affairs correspondent for NPR, Nina Totenberg, yanking desperately on the heartstrings of leftists, wrote,

as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”

As her strength waned, RBG seemed to assume that a “new” president would be installed in November. Either that or she had the strange notion that her replacement could be forestalled until 2024.

But, not even RBG’s waning strength or death can magically transform her fervent wish into political reality. Her dictated wish/statement is no more constitutionally or politically relevant than would be the dying wishes of any other Supreme Court Justice. America does not owe RBG the fulfillment of her fervent wish, and saying that is not disrespectful.

How ironic that the left would appeal to civic ethics after the shocking display of disrespect they demonstrated when President Trump and the First Lady were paying their respects to RBG. Along with booing and chanting “Vote him out,” the mostly Millennial constitutional ignoramuses/Biden supporters also shouted “Honor her wish.”

They had the audacity to use the word “honor” as they shouted and booed a sitting president as he paid his respects to RBG. Just imagine if he hadn’t paid his respects. Damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t by the urchins who demand honorable behavior as they set fire to cities and threaten the lives of police officers.

Moving forward, do leftists really want all the dying wishes of all Supreme Court Justices honored?

Some note that RBG deserves adulation because she was a “trailblazer” for feminist and homosexual causes, a claim which also reveals why she is deserving of opprobrium—no matter how much Justice Scalia loved her.

RBG is admired for her work as both a litigator and jurist in obliterating sex distinctions in the law. In some cases, sex distinctions were unwise and even harmful, but her efforts extended beyond helping widowers access their deceased spouses’ social security benefits. Her efforts to wholly efface sex differences pointed forward to and paved the way for the legal destruction of marriage, which she ardently supported.

While her support for the legal recognition of intrinsically non-marital unions as marriages is one of the reasons RBG is worshipped, it is not the central reason—at least not the central reason leftist women with unwomanly, selfish sentiments worship her.

RBG is worshipped by women with unwomanly, selfish sentiments because she was a fierce foe of the right of preborn humans to live. The central tenet of the religion of Harris/Biden supporters is “Thou shalt be free to kill humans in the womb at any age and for any reason.” The central sacrament of their religion is the sacrifice of their children. RBG was their supreme goddess.

There were two chances that President Trump would nominate another goddess of death: slim and fat.

Since lurking in the dark penumbras formed by gaseous emanations emitted by the Bill of Rights there never was a right to off one’s offspring, leftist women in the Church of Child Sacrifice desperately fear the confirmation of a Justice that reveres the Constitution more than she reveres precedent. And that’s why leftist women fear the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett.

While those in rebellion against nature and God detest Barrett’s faith, they more detest that she’s a constitutional originalist. For those who use the Supreme Court as their supreme policy-making body, the prospect of a Justice who will honor the text of the Constitution over and above the precedents of nine—some of whom are partisan—justices and above the social and political winds of the day, Barrett is their worst nightmare.

She is by all accounts—even the accounts of former colleagues on the political left—brilliant and of impeccable character.

In an Newsweek Magazine editorial, Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, heartily commends Barrett as an “unassailable—probably unbeatable” nominee who possesses the “character, temperament, intellect, experience and judicial philosophy” to make an outstanding Justice who could leave a “deep and lasting mark on our constitutional jurisprudence.”

Leftists—particularly members of the Church of Child Sacrifice—with a virulent hatred of theologically orthodox Christian faith and adoration of pagan sexuality detest Barrett for her originalist judicial philosophy, her Catholic faith, and her demonstrable, lived-out love for all lives—including those deemed most expendable by body perfectionists. Barrett and her husband have seven children, including one special needs child and two children adopted from Haiti.

Leftists criticize Barrett’s “thin” judicial record, saying she’s been on the bench for only three years, which is three years longer than Elena Kagan had served before she was nominated by Barack Obama.

Overheated, paranoid leftist conspiracy theorists have tried to caricature Barrett as a Handmaid breeder who belongs to a religious cult, and former Senator Diane Feinstein let slip her ugly religious bigotry during Barrett’s 2017 nomination hearing for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, saying,

I think in your case, professor, when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you. And that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years.

Feinstein may be surprised to learn that Christ expects the “dogma” to live loudly within every one of his followers. The “dogma” living loudly within Barrett is likely one of the reasons she and her husband adopted two children.

Since the Constitution prohibits religious tests for holding office, Senate Democrats are now going to have to tread very carefully when attacking Barrett’s religion. But they’re nothing if not skillful in Newspeak and sophistry, so it will be interesting to hear how they try to malign Barrett’s faith without appearing to be attempting to disqualify her based on her religion.

There should be no more justification needed for supporting Trump’s reelection than the nomination of the stellar Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. Democrats have nothing to fear because Barrett will not set policy from the bench.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:


P.S. Our get-out-the-vote campaign is up and running. We are distributing the IFI Voter Guide to hundreds of churches, civic groups and tea party organizations. Will you financially support our endeavor to educate Illinois voters and promote Christian family values?