Al Gore is an evangelical, born again Christian, just like Miers.

Religious affiliation and belief mean squat in terms of political and, in the case of Miers, judicial philosophy. * is trying to reassure his base that she's "on their side", meaning anti-choice. Well she may be (I heard her church is), but that doesn't mean she'll act on it. Just ask Gore. But hey, she did contribute to his campaign, albeit 17 years ago.

My Dad is a Southern Baptist and he's pro-choice.

It's not a pre-requisite. :)

I suspect Miers is going to be another O'Connor. But, of course, she'll pardon any of the bushistas who Fitz takes down, but that's another story.

When * says that he knows her heart, and when Pat Robertson comes out in support, and when James Dobson says he now has no problem but can't say why, you know full well what they mean. She's anti-abortion, anti-choice, and in lock-step with * and her relgious group rather than loyal to the constitution and America. At one time these things were not mutually exclusive. Today they are.

That means they will say and do everything to get this done. What she'll do once she has the lifetime position, long after * is a dried up tumbleweed on his pig farm, remains to be seen.

or doesn't want to receive the eucharist
http://www.yourcatholicvoice.org/articles.php?article=28

My Catholic women friends all took birth control when it was considered a mortal sin to do so. I knew Catholics who frequently ate meat on Fridays. And I knew many who got divorces, trying to scramble with the annulment issue, or simply blowing the whole thing off. If they ever remarried they would then deal with it, but it didn't seem to be a huge problem. Hypocrisy abounds in the Catholic religion, as elsewhere.

not everyone tries to force their religious beliefs on their neighbor.

Now if she were the member of some wacko cult I'd take notice.

The problem is that when you mix religion with your politics and believe that your belief should be the guide for others all bets are off.

There are many believers that get the church/state seperation thing. But there are an increasing number that have discarded that notion and they represent a threat to our free society.

"I am affiliated with faith x, and if I am elected, I am going to do y, z, and k because of faith x, and I will continue to be influenced by faith x in the future" and people went ahead and voted for him/her anyway, then he/she did what they said they were going to do.

Would they have a mandate to do what they said? What if what they said did not contravene the separation of church and state? Would they be allowed to impose their faith influenced positions on others?

orange/orange, blue raspberry. Step right up, take a big, deep drink.

Come on, she would not be the nominee, endorsed by Dobson, Robertson and Reid if she were pro-choice. There is no silver lining.

the poster didn't say she was pro life, rather the poster stated just being a Christian doesn't automaticall mean she is pro life.

I think she is pro life for the reason you stated, Bush knows her and wouldn't nominate a pro choicer, not because she is a Christian.

Not saying Meirs isn't the biggest disaster of a Fundie on two feet, but please, people.

Let's not forget that a lot of folks thought JFK would be getting his daily orders from the Pope.

Miers was chosen for reason and your analogy does not apply. Besides that why does she not answer the simple question? I surely hope you are not suggesting she has not formed an opinion already.

I really wish I were talking about Gore's or Kerry's SCOTUS choices, but we have to deal with the reality in front of us. Who do you think * will nominate if he withdraws Miers? Do you really think we Dems can intimidate him into nominating a real liberal? I'm afraid someone MUCH worse (e.g. Ted Olson) is waiting in the wings.

that what used to pass for "born again" has now changed.

It used to just refer to being re-born in Christ.

Now, it seems to be code for narrow-minded, judgmental, holier than thou, wanna be rich cause God wants me to be rich, SUV driving, planet raping moron.

Don't think Al is one of those.

And that is my point. He is a declared born again Christian. Can't always judge a book by its cover.

what may have accurately described a person twenty five years ago - now may mean something entirely different.

I know many Christians who now find the term "born again" offensive.
Because it's been usurped and modified by those who now use it to define themselves.

e.g., I can't even imagine Billy Graham ever saying that anyone would deserve the wrath of God as retribution. But his son, Franklin, is now on record as saying that Katrina is God's judgment on NOLA.

When the definition changes, is it the label still relevant to those of us who "were washed in the blood" in our youth?

It's a confusing thing to find myself mid-life, no longer able to use a word I was taught in my childhood that I thought fit me. Because I myself feel no kinship with Franklin Graham and others like him.

about those who proclaim themselves to be "born again". I was put off and confused when I learned that Gore describes himself in this way. I do tend to associate it with intolerance, bigotry, and narrow mindedness. Maybe the term has a different meaning now. But I think we should judge Miers on other things than her religious affiliation. Just my 2 cents.

Certainly not a lot of information available, though, is there?

He was also a progressive socialist and revolutionized this country.

Unacceptable, REJECT HER....

He sends young men and women to death every single day.

This is why they (the whackos) are so upset. They are beginning to see the light. And that is that he used them.

He's on shaky ground with them, IMO, and is giving them what they want.

Some religious conservatives have expressed deep dissatisfaction with the Miers nomination, grumbling that she never has taken public stands on hot-button social issues. But her friends point to her membership at a suburban Dallas church as evidence that she is cut from conservative cloth. They say she's not a "holy roller" who flaunts her religion on her sleeve but she lives her faith as a born-again Christian.

Miers' longtime on-and-off companion — himself a Texas Supreme Court justice — and other confidants pledge that her judicial values would be guided by the law and the Constitution. But they say her personal values have been shaped by her abiding faith in Jesus and by her membership in Valley View Christian Church, where she was baptized as an adult, served on the missions committee and taught religious classes.

At Valley View, pastors preach that abortion is murder, the Bible is the literal word of God and homosexuality is a sin. They also preach that God loves everybody.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002540461_scotus05.html?syndication=rss&source=seattletimes.xml&items=154

and everything you say is true.

But Bush belongs to the same group and I think it is obvious that he has used that wing, he didn't come through for them on Schiavo, and neither did his brother.

That's all. I'm not defending him or her. Of course, if I had my choice it would not be her or anyone else he picks.

All of us have said, or most of us have said, at one point or another that he uses those values and the people who believe in them. He doesn't really care about them. Just like he doesn't care about ordinary Americans. It is all one big slight of hand he uses on all of America, whackos and normal people included.

Although, it is their fault for not recognizing it sooner. He is for himself and his corporate cronies only. He will give them talk about what he is trying to do for their causes, but there is really little action.

Of course I could be way off on this.

on edit: Oops, meant to reply to post # 18.

she quit three weeks ago. The pastor, Ron Key had a falling out with the church over "leadership". She and about 200 other sheeps in the flock went with him and are forming their own church.

when I posted about this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4976941#4977432

Gore has also described himself as a born-again Christian fairly recently, and maintains a broad definition of exactly what that means: An aide says that Gore means it as more of a philosophical coming to terms with his religious upbringing. But there is reason to believe that for Gore there's much more there than what he talks about on the stump.

Both candidates benefit from the term's new "fuzziness," Walker says. "When Jimmy Carter said he was a born-again Christian in 1976, he was taking a political risk," Walker says. Gore and Bush are not. "I wonder in both cases whether they are deliberately or inadvertently profiting from the ambiguity of that word," Walker says. "The term may be highly serviceable because of its ambiguity." Gore can use the term to appeal to the religious right without turning off the left, since even modern agnostics and secularists now use the term to describe their coming to terms with their spirituality, in a way that has nothing to do with Jesus. Bush, meanwhile, can use the term to satisfy his core conservative constituency without alienating possible crossover voters.

So yes, Bush and Gore use Jesus to their benefit. At a time when religion and spirituality are enjoying a new popularity, with a Gallup poll showing that 96 percent of Americans believe in God or a universal spirit, both candidates' faiths are like any other key line in their bios. And only the most cynical could believe either man is insincere in his frequent exaltations. Both seem genuinely religious. But while both men are proudly born-again, their beliefs are quite different, and not only has their faith taken the two men in very different directions as politicians, the vastly different ways they see religion and Jesus would make them very different presidents.
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:__t8elBgs2MJ:www.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/07/07/born_again/+Al+Gore+is+a+born+again+Christian&hl=en

I do not know why people are naive enough to think the Supreme Court is composed of people who represent a philosophical, theological, or Constitutional likemindness to the president who appointed them. The Supreme Court is today, and always has been, a political reward for political favors. The rest is a mere charade.

Thus Bush* appointed Roberts because of his legal advice to Jeb and the Florida legislature during the 2000 election controversy. Roberts worked on a pro bono basis during this crisis.

Miers was Bush*s personal attorney while he was governor of Texas. She has pulled a lot of defensive maneuvers for her president, and she now has been moved into a position to reap her reward.

And that's what it is all about. The hearings, the debate, the intense questioning is for the benefit of public posturing and The Charade.

Al Gore is a Southern Baptist, as was I. I tremendously admire him and have for years. I left the Southern Baptist Church when that church became the ONLY church in the United States to endorse Bush*s preemptive attack on Iraq. I truly could not believe it. Al Gore, who gave a tremendous speech against invading Iraq, stayed with the church. He is a better man than I.

The Southern Baptists are also extremely pro-life. Al Gore in his early career voted the preference of his constituency, but was always torn on the subject because he personally felt the decision to have an abortion properly belonged with the woman. As he matured as a politician, he broke with the conservative constituency in Tennessee and with the Baptist Church by saying abortion should be legal but rare. He thinks the government should stay out of the decision.

So back to your thread topic ... I think we know exactly where Gore departs from his church. We do not know where Miers stands, but we do know Bush pays his political debts BIG TIME.

Personally, like you, I think chronyism is at the bottom of this nomination. I also believe Democrats should hold nothing back in terms of interrogating her. But I would hope that religion doesn't enter into the debate. This, I believe, is a red herring.