With tensions over SCOTUS nomination at a boiling point, a USA Today article discusses if Brett Kavanaugh should continue coaching girls’ basketball team, bringing into the story recent child sex abuse scandals in US sports.

The article by USA Today’s Erik Brandy has triggered a major backlash among conservatives on social media.

The FBI is now investigating the accusations of Christine Blasey Ford that Kavanaugh assaulted her 36 years ago, after both gave emotional testimonies at the Senate Judiciary Committee that decided to move the Supreme Court nominee vote to the full Senate.

Kavanaugh denies he is the culprit in the attack on Ford and accuses Democrats of orchestrating the scandal that he says ruined his life. Brandy focuses his vitriolic piece on Kavanugh’s remark during the hearing that he might not be able to coach his daughter’s basketball team again – something that he said he loved more than anything he has done in his life.

The article’s headline “Is Brett Kavanaugh right that he can no longer coach girls basketball?” remains rhetorical throughout and leads to the conclusion that “accused sex offenders should not coach youth basketball, girls or boys, without deeper investigation.”

Brandy brings in references to the case of Larry Nassar, USA Gymnastics team coach who was found guilty of multiple sexual assaults, and after setting this background for the readers expresses his surprise that Kavanaugh can still coach for the Catholic Youth Organization and his daughters’ private school in Washington.

“He has no record and has no criminal background. He’s gone through the (training) process. He can coach,” Edward McFadden, spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Washington is quoted.

Yet Brandy goes on to wonder if he should and brings in the US Center for SafeSport, set up in 2017, to probe sexual misconduct claims while admitting that it has essentially no relation to the issue, as it does not cover youth sports.

The organization’s spokesperson, Dan Hill, says that a credible allegation of sexual misconduct may spark an investigation even with the lack of formal charges. Again, Hill did not refer to Kavanaugh, speaking in general, Brandy concedes, but his remark fits the narrative anyway.

As soon as the US Today article came out, conservative Twitter responded with indignation and outrage.

Some saw the piece as a reflection of partisan brinkmanship, that is getting uglier as the congressional elections inch closer.

The conservative commentators did not mince words, calling the op-ed “disgusting,” “horrifying”, “reprehensible” and “stupid”.

Have the Left have reached the bottom yet? – Mike Cernovich, right-wing political activist and writer asked.

The question will probably also have to remain rhetorical, though.</s>The high school friend of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, whose name has been drawn into the allegations leveled against the Supreme Court nominee by several women, said Friday he would cooperate with any law enforcement investigation that will “confidentially” probe the allegations, which he “categorically” denies.

In a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Friday, Mark Judge, denied the latest round of accusations brought against him and Kavanaugh by Julie Swetnick—the client of Stormy Daniels’ attorney Michael Avenatti.

Swetnick accused Kavanaugh and Judge of making unwanted sexual advances at women while at parties in high school in the early 1980s, drugging the “punch” at parties, and participating in “gang rapes” and “train rapes.” Swetnick claims she is a victim of gang rape, and said that both Judge and Kavanaugh were there to watch the incident.

“In response to the Committee’s request for information, I, MARK JUDGE, declare: The allegations in the Swetnick affidavit are so bizarre that, even while suffering from my addiction, I would remember actions so outlandish. I categorically deny them,” Judge, a recovering alcoholic, said in the letter.

“I do not know Julie Swetnick,” he continued. “I do not recall attending parties during 1981-1983 when I fondled or grabbed women in an aggressive or unwanted manner.”

Judge went on to say that he has “never spiked punch to get anyone drunk or disoriented.”

“Nor have I witnessed Brett Kavanaugh spike punch,” Judge wrote. “I have never engaged in any gang rape of any woman, including Ms. Swetnick.”

Judge said he would “cooperate with any law enforcement agency that is assigned to confidentially investigate these allegations,” and signed the statement “under penalty of felony.”

Another Kavanaugh accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, testified on Capitol Hill before the committee Thursday, and claimed that Kavanaugh, while at a high school party 36 years ago, pinned her down and tried to remove her clothing. Ford claimed that Judge was in the room, and jumped on top of them on the bed.

Judge, as recently as Thursday, denied Ford’s allegations, while sharing personal information to support his desire to remain out of the public eye.

“We have told the Committee that I do not want to comment about these events publicly. As a recovering alcoholic and a cancer survivor, I have struggled with depression and anxiety,” Judge wrote in a letter to the committee Thursday. “As a result, I avoid public speaking.”

He added: “I do not recall the events described by Dr. Ford in her testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee today. I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes.”

Kavanaugh vehemently denied the allegations leveled against him by Ford and Swetnick on Thursday before the committee. Another woman, Deborah Ramirez, claimed that while they were freshmen at Yale University, Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a dorm party. Kavanaugh has also denied this allegation.

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday, following a vote in the affirmative to recommend Kavanaugh’s nomination to the full Senate for a vote, has requested a delay in order for a week-long FBI investigation into the allegations.

“The Senate Judiciary Committee will request that the administration instruct the FBI to conduct a supplemental background investigation with respect to the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to be an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court,” the committee statement read. “The supplemental FBI background investigation would be limited to current credible allegations against the nominee and must be completed no later than one week from today.”

If the committee request is fulfilled, the FBI supplemental probe will be complete next Friday, Oct. 5

Friday afternoon, President Trump said that he would “rely” on the Senate Judiciary Committee.</s>Sen. Christopher Coons (D-CT) on Friday morning choked up on learning Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), a key Republican swing vote, announced he will vote to confirm Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, according to reporters on Capitol Hill.

CNN reporter Elizabeth Landers says Coons became visibly emotional when her colleague Sunlen Serfaty revealed Flake’s decision, prompting the Democrat lawmaker to respond: “Oh f*ck. We each make choices for our own reason. I’m struggling, sorry.”

Coons, described as a close friend of Flake, wrote in a 2017 October New York Times opinion-editorial that Flake’s departure from the Senate should “scare Democrats,” describing him as one of the few Republicans “willingness to speak out against his party’s current standard-bearer.”

Earlier, Flake’s office released a statement announcing the Arizona lawmaker’s support for Kavanaugh. “After hearing more than 30 hours of testimony from Judge Kavanaugh earlier this month, I was prepared to support his nomination based on his view of the law and his record as a judge,” Flake said in a statement. “In fact, I commented at the time that had he been nominated in another era, he would have likely received 90+ votes.”

Prior to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Friday meeting, protesters confronted Flake and a staffer in a Senate elevator. “I told the story of my sexual assault. I told it because I recognized the story that she is telling the truth,” the woman said to Flake. “What you are doing is allowing someone who actually violating a woman to sit on the Supreme Court. This is not tolerable,” one protester said. “I have two children. I cannot imagine that for the next 40 years they will have to have someone in the Supreme Court who has been accused of violating a young girl. What are you doing, sir?”

“You’re telling all women that they don’t matter, that they should just stay quiet because if they tell you what happened to them you are going to ignore them,” another protester, near tears, said to the Arizona lawmaker. “That’s what you’re telling me when you vote for him. Don’t look away from me.”</s>Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh may keep facing political attacks from the left if he is confirmed to the nation’s highest court.

Kavanaugh faced an onslaught of attacks from Democrats and liberal activists even before Palo Alto University professor Christine Blasey Ford accused him of drunkenly trying to force himself on her while the two were in high school. Kavanaugh emphatically denied Ford’s accusation in an emotional testimony on Thursday.

Brian Fallon, former press secretary on Hillary Clinton’s unsuccessful 2016 presidential campaign, predicted that Kavanaugh “will not serve for life” if confirmed to the Supreme Court.

Fallon leads Demand Justice, a Democratic dark money group dedicated to opposing Kavanaugh’s confirmation, and previously called for Kavanaugh to be impeached from his current position on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

“If Senate GOP ignores Dr. Blasey Ford and tries to muscle an attempted rapist onto the Supreme Court: 1. They will pay dearly this November. 2. Senators up in 2020 (Collins, Gardner et al) will feel intense heat for next two years. 3. Kavanaugh will not serve for life,” Fallon predicted.

Some congressional Democrats are already pledging to investigate Kavanaugh if they retake Congress with him sitting on the Supreme Court.

Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Senate Judiciary Committee member, pledged to investigate Kavanaugh “as soon as Democrats get the gavel.”

“This is such bad practice that even if they were to ram this guy through, as soon as Democrats get gavels we’re going to want to get to the bottom of this,” Whitehouse told CNN on Sept. 20.

“His background is fair for consideration, both before he is confirmed and, if he should be confirmed, we would be duty-bound to follow-up on any blemishes on his record that were not fully discovered prior to his confirmation,” Democratic Georgia Rep. Hank Johnson told The Intercept on Wednesday. “We would owe that to the American people.”

Democratic California Rep. Ted Lieu “would need more information” before weighing in on Kavanaugh’s impeachment, he told The Daily Caller News Foundation in a private Twitter message on Thursday.

Lieu noted he hasn’t “heard Mark Judge or the other accusers questioned under oath” but didn’t rule out supporting impeachment.

One of Lieu’s fellow California Democrats, Rep. Eric Swalwell, previously floated the possibility of a “judicial impeachment” in the event that Kavanaugh is confirmed.

“If the Republicans rush through a nominee where you have unanswered sexual assault allegations, I can promise you that Democratic senators will be interested in going and looking at those allegations, and if Judge Kavanaugh lied under oath, you could see a judicial impeachment, and that’s not good for anybody, so we should try and avoid that,” Swalwell told Fox News in a Sept. 22 interview.

Liberal activists and journalists on Thursday predicted a push to impeach Kavanaugh if he is confirmed and Democrats retake Congress.

RELATED: Democrats Stomp Out of Kavanaugh Hearing After Motion Gets Voted Down

Kavanaugh slammed Senate Democrats’ no-holds-barred campaign to stop his nomination in his statement before the judiciary committee on Thursday.

“This confirmation process has become a national disgrace,” Kavanaugh said. “The Constitution gives the Senate an important role in the confirmation process, but you have replaced ‘with advice and consent’ with ‘search and destroy.'”

“What you want to do is destroy this guy’s life, hold this seat open, and hope you win in 2020,” Graham said.

He went on to call the entire process “the most unethical sham since I’ve been in politics.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.</s>Fox News severed its ties to contributor Kevin Jackson on Thursday after Jackson tweeted a string of vulgar attacks on women making sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

During Thursday’s hearing in which both Kavanaugh and accuser Christine Blasey Ford spoke to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Jackson called the women who have accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct “lying skanks.”

Fox responded by ending its relationship with him.

“Kevin Jackson has been terminated as a contributor,” Fox said in a statement, according to Time. “His comments on today’s hearings were reprehensible and do not reflect the values of Fox News.”

Kavanaugh has denied three separate accusations of sexual assault from the 1980s when he was in high school and college.

TRENDING: Ford Contradicts WaPo Article, Says She Doesn’t Recall Who Drove Her Home

Jackson attacked the accusers in several tweets.

“Feminists are their own worst enemies, and the enemy of women,” Jackson tweeted. “Also, they want men to NEVER be believed. I’m not succumbing. To HELL with the notion women must be believed no matter what. Lying skanks is what these three women are, and we ALL know more.”

In another tweet, he said, “Leftist women are skanky for the most part. More will be sued and made to pay for their lies.”

One tweet that he later deleted took a very personal shot at Ford.

“#ChristineBlaseyFord academic problems came from her PROMISCUITY! Dang girl, stop opening your legs and OPEN A BOOK!” he posted, according to Variety.

Other tweets offered his take on the hearing.

RELATED: Judge Nap: If Kavanaugh Confirmation Fails, Trump Has One Last Option

Jackson offered no apology, and even after being fired he was taunting those whose feathers he ruffled.

“Just so we are clear #Leftists, I stand on my principles even if it costs me a gig You remain lying scum, willing to CRUSH good people for your devilish ideology,” he tweeted Friday.

Jackson, who hosts a syndicated radio show, he had been a Fox contributor since 2014. He is the author of the book “Race Pimping: The Multi-Trillion Dollar Business of Liberalism.”

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.</s>How The Judicial Crisis Network Is Reacting To The Kavanaugh Hearings And Allegations

We're going to bring in now Carrie Severino. She's the chief counsel and policy director for the conservative Judicial Crisis Network. The group spent about a million and a half dollars in ads supporting Judge Kavanaugh's nomination. Welcome to the studio.

CARRIE SEVERINO: Great to be here.

CORNISH: So in the past, you've said that you have been against this call from Democrats to reopen the FBI investigation. Now you have Republican Jeff Flake and others supporting this idea. Do you think it's a good idea at this point to pause the process and let the FBI do something limited in scope?

SEVERINO: Well, I think the important thing here is that Judge Kavanaugh today did move one step closer to his nomination. He's out of committee. And, you know, if Senator Flake and - is more comfortable by having that - you know, it seems like has always been something the White House and the Senate were going to have to cooperate in doing. They've said they're going to do it. I don't think really we're going to find a difference in outcome here, especially with the Ford allegations. The Senate Judiciary Committee has already interviewed all the people relevant to it. So the FBI will essentially be retreading that ground, interviewing some of the same people.

CORNISH: But there's also people who have come out in reports we've heard about on paper but that the committee has not spoken to directly. Wouldn't agents be able to talk in more detail to them, figure out bystanders?

SEVERINO: Right, well, as I just said, if people don't want to talk to the FBI, it's the same procedure as the Senate Judiciary Committee. So they aren't going be able to force people to speak who before were submitting written testimony. They - but they could of course submit that same testimony to the FBI. It's the same criminal penalties - would apply for speaking to the FBI as for speaking to the Senate Judiciary Committee or under oath.

So they're - in all cases is equivalent in terms of their - you know, their criminal penalties. But so I think especially with respect to those ones, it should be pretty easy. We have a good sense of where all those people are in terms of they've already been talked to and located about this.

CORNISH: So you're fine with this happening at this point. Now that it's open, you're fine to let it go forward.

SEVERINO: I'm glad to see that it's limited in time and scope because I think that was a concern - that it's going to become an indefinite fishing expedition - and that it's being limited to the credible allegations 'cause we're seeing some - you know, some people coming out of woodwork who then hours later are recanting this. So I think that it's...

CORNISH: That's not clear. I just want to note we don't...

SEVERINO: Oh, that was - no, that was last week. There were some allegations that were recanted by the individuals within hours of being made. So I think this will rule out some of those issues. But, you know, they're going to move forward I think. And now, again, a week I think should be probably more than enough time. With Anita Hill's investigation, it took three days. So...

CORNISH: Let me ask you about the president then. He said that today, that professor Ford was very - a very compelling witness, that he's leaving this up to the Senate. So what concerns do you have then when you see Lisa Murkowski backing up this? You see Susan Collins backing up this idea of further investigation. As the process goes on further, do you have worries about this vote?

SEVERINO: No, I actually - I think this is going to probably give them that added level of comfort they need to go forward 'cause what we saw at the hearing - it was yesterday - was they have - you know, Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford both had very compelling, emotional testimony. But when you look - when you start digging into the evidence and the contemporary corroboration, et cetera, it's simply not there. Everyone she put at that party and said was there says they don't remember it. Some say they can't imagine Brett Kavanaugh behaving the way that she described. Her own friend...

CORNISH: Though none of those people have said they don't believe it happened. They just said that they...

SEVERINO: No, I didn't say they...

SEVERINO: I just said they can't corroborate that it did. And so I think that we're going to see some of that. And, you know, if the senators are more comfortable having the FBI make the - that determination rather than the Senate Judiciary Committee, they're going to do that. At the end of the day, we'll be in the same place. I think we'll have a vote within a week and that that will be their opportunity to say, are we voting for someone who is the most, you know, qualified nominee and respected nominee I think we've had in - of many of our Supreme Court nominees, or are we going to vote for a last-minute really vicious campaign by some of the Senate Democrats, certainly not all of them?

CORNISH: Well, let me jump in. I want to play a clip for you from our program yesterday because we spoke to a law professor, Joshua Blackman, about the impact that this process altogether will have on the court itself. Here it is.

JOSH BLACKMAN: The biggest loser in this entire process is the Supreme Court. No matter what happens - if Kavanaugh is confirmed, if his nomination is withdrawn, if someone else is put up - the Supreme Court turns out looking very bad.

CORNISH: Your take on that?

SEVERINO: Well, you know, I think the - actually the people who look the worst here are the Senate, not the Supreme Court itself 'cause one of the things that I loved - and I worked there 10 years ago. I think it was - one of the inspiring things is that you have justices across the aisle. You know, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Scalia's friendship was famous for being two of the most extreme - on extreme ends of the court, and yet they can come together. These are people who know they're going to be working together for their life.

And I don't think those partisan hot-button issues that happened during the confirmation hearing are going to necessarily taint the relationship on the court. You had Justice Ginsburg, you know, just a couple weeks ago saying her frustration with this process, though, and she - her saying that the way it was was right; the way it is is wrong.

And so I think they're - they are also frustrated with the way the process goes. But I think you're going to see them continue to be respecting Judge Kavanaugh the same way that they did, you know, the dozen times and more times that they have cited his opinions and vindicated his decisions as well.

CORNISH: That's Carrie Severino, chief counsel and policy director for the Judicial Crisis Network. Thank you for speaking with us.

SEVERINO: Great to be here.</s>The FBI has reached out to a second woman who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault -- a day after President Trump ordered the bureau to conduct a new background investigation.

An attorney for Deborah Ramirez, who claims that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a Yale college party several years ago, said that the FBI had reached out to her.

"We can confirm the FBI has reached out to interview Ms. Ramirez and she has agreed to cooperate with their investigation," attorney John Clune said in a statement. "Out of respect for the integrity of the process, we will have no further comment at this time."

The development was first reported by The Washington Post.

The FBI background check comes after Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., joined Democrats on Friday in calling for the investigation into sexual assault allegations made against Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh has repeatedly denied all accusations against him.

FLAKE DEFENDS CALL FOR KAVANAUGH DELAY: 'WE'RE COMING APART AT THE SEAMS'

On Thursday Kavanaugh testified to a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing after Christine Blasey Ford testified that he had assaulted her at a high school party in 1982. In a blistering response, he called the circumstances surrounding his nomination a "circus."

On Friday, the committee voted to recommend Kavanaugh to the Senate for confirmation to the high court post, but Flake requested the “limited” weeklong background check. With Republicans holding a very slim majority in the Senate, Trump ordered the investigation despite GOP leaders having previously argued there was no need for further investigation.

The inquiry is expected to wrap by Friday.

Republicans have accused Democrats of trying to delay the vote until after the midterms, when Democrats are hoping to have retaken control of the Senate. Democrats, in turn, have assailed what they say has been a rush toward confirmation regardless of the allegations against the judge.

On Friday Flake defended his decision to press for the further inquiry, saying he wanted to protect the credibility of America’s institutions.

“Two institutions, really,” he told The Atlantic. “One, the Supreme Court is the lone institution where most Americans still have some faith. And then the U.S. Senate as an institution — we’re coming apart at the seams. There’s no currency, no market for reaching across the aisle. It just makes it so difficult.”

However, he also said that the delay could eventually help both Republicans, and Kavanaugh himself.

“Obviously. I’ve felt that this delay is as much to help him as us. My hope is that some Democrats will say, “Hey, we may not change our vote, but this process was worthy of the institution, and we feel satisfied.”

"That means something,” he said. “The country needs to hear that.”

A third woman has also leveled charges against Kavanaugh. As was the case with Ford and Ramirez, she said the events occurred decades ago.

In a sworn declaration, Julie Swetnick of Washington, D.C., said she witnessed him "consistently engage in excessive drinking and inappropriate contact of a sexual nature with women in the early 1980s."

As with the other cases, the judge has maintained his innocence.</s>Of course everyone recognizes that the battle over the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh is a battle — all understand that there is a fight going on. And more than a few understand that the battle is over Roe. But this understanding is greater on the side of the secularists, their understanding is much more pronounced. Many Christians — bless their hearts — think this battle is over whether Brett Kavanaugh actually was a sex offender.

If you would be so kind, I would like to address all of this through a series of short observations, short but inescapable. I trust that doing so in this way will help Christians to get to the heart of the matter.

Christians and secularists both have a blood-red sacrament at the center of their understanding of the world. We have the broken body of Christ, and the wine-red blood of Christ, the meaning of which is my life for yours. They have tens of millions of dismembered children, all of whose bodies have had very different words spoken over them — your life for mine. Because we are followers of Christ, one is a faith of self-sacrifice, even if it costs us our lives. The other is a religion of self-indulgence, even if it costs you yours.

Criminals will go to great lengths to cover up a crime, or to prevent that crime from being brought into open court. The same goes for entire societies that have given themselves over to criminal behavior, as ours has. A people, a nation, a party, a faction, that has the blood-guilt of 60 million children on its hands, will certainly not stick at slandering a nominated jurist if that slander will successfully prevent a reckoning for the murders.

A society that is complicit in guilt of this magnitude cannot afford to honor Lady Justice. She is their sworn enemy. Due process is their adversary. An orderly weighing of evidence is the very last thing they can afford to allow. And so a society that will not repent of murdering the children is a society that must insist on murdering Lady Justice. There is a reason they hate that woman.

TRENDING: Nikki Haley Just Revealed What Happened After UN Members Laughed at Trump

Much rides on whether Senate Republicans discover a spine, and confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Court. They should do so regardless of what is said or done from this point out.

Gorsuch replaced Scalia, and so did not tip the balance of the court. Kavanaugh is slated to replace Kennedy, who was a swing vote. But on issues like abortion and sexual deviance, Kennedy was a friend of the progressives. Kavanaugh is not, and so would likely move the court back toward some form of sanity. Hence this battle. But if the next open seat on the Court is to replace someone like Ginsburg, then we will likely be at the point of open civil war. And when I use the phrase civil war, I am not speaking metaphorically. This battle over Kavanaugh is an example of the secularists stretching “ordinary” politics to the absolute breaking point. The reason they are more than willing to go way beyond ordinary politics is seen in a word I used earlier, which was reckoning.

That word reckoning is important. If — through the undeserved mercies of God — Roe were ever to be struck down, and America turned from the crime of human abortion in real repentance (and real repentance is the only way out for us), then this would mean far more than a mere shift in policy direction. It would not be that the party that wanted abortions available would be now unable to have it their way until the next election.

Rather, there would have to be a spiritual sea change. This would mean that those who always stood against these murders would remain right where they were. Many of those who were complicit in the slaughter, who had repented, would turn from the very thought of continuing such crimes in furious self-loathing. And those who insisted on staying faithful to the blood-lusts of secularism would necessarily become pariahs—like so many Buchenwald guards living in Argentina now. They are not willing for such an outcome, and they will fight to the last ditch to prevent it.

There will be no liberation from this crime of human abortion unless and until there is a willingness to name the sin for what it was, is, and always will be. Abortion is human sacrifice. Not only is it human sacrifice, it is human sacrifice that is futile, vain, useless, empty, stupid, and fruitless. The gods being propitiated are gods that are deaf, dumb and blind. These gods of self-indulgence are unable to save anyone. The gods of self-indulgence led us into the morass that we need salvation from. They are the blind guides who got us into this, and cannot be trusted to get us out. We must leave them behind.

Human sacrifice is inescapable. The Christian faith is also a religion of human sacrifice. But the sacrifice that occupies the center of our faith was a once-for-all sacrifice. The death of Christ on the cross extracted the sting of death completely, and the resurrection of Jesus from the grave swallowed up death forever. The potent sacrifice of Christ was the death of every form of vain sacrifice. So the choice before us is plain. We must opt for the definitive, once-for-all blood sacrifice, which happened outside Jerusalem two thousand years ago, or we must settle in for the secularist alternative, which is endless blood sacrifice, ongoing blood sacrifice, recurring blood sacrifice, with rivers of blood being poured down that yawning, gaping, and bottomless pit called self.

So far from removing blood-guilt, the crime of human abortion generates blood guilt, multiplying it. When we hear the words of Christ, my life for yours, we respond to Him in faith by surrendering our lives. When we surrender our lives, we find that they are then returned back to us, thirty, sixty, and one hundred-fold. We surrender our lives, and they are then given back to us. Not only are our lives given back to us, but they are given back to us alive. But when we cling to our lives, and to the flattering and sibilant gods who entice us with them, we look up at the end of the day to discover that we are missing a v. All this time, we were clinging to lies, not lives. And so we lose the very thing we thought was everything. We gambled and lost. The man who gains the whole world and loses his soul, loses something else in the process — the whole world. The end of that process is the outer darkness, in which there is nothing but time to gnaw on the remnants of self, which by that time will be like trying to chew smoke.

We are a stiff-necked generation. We are a wicked, apostate and backsliding people. If NFL players were kneeling in repentance for all the abortions they have procured for their various girlfriends, and were weeping because they lived in a nation that permitted and encouraged that kind of vile behavior, such a response would be entirely appropriate. But however appropriate it might be, I can pretty much guarantee that the football player who started such a movement would not be receiving millions of dollars from Nike.

“He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.”

RELATED: Why Another FBI Investigation of Kavanaugh Would Be Pointless

Why do I write this way? Because the word of Christ is a sharp sword “with which to strike down the nations.” America is a nation, and desperately needs to be struck down. The only alternative is whether or not we will be struck down into repentance, or struck down in the fury of wrath, in a judgment from God that is hissing hot.

Douglas Wilson is a prolific author, speaker, and the minister of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho.

A version of this Op-Ed was originally posted on BLOG & MABLOG.

The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.</s>As he faces a Senate Judiciary Committee vote on his nomination to the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh picked up a major endorsement Friday morning as Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake said he would support Kavanaugh.

“Our system of justice affords a presumption of innocence to the accused, absent corroborating evidence,” Flake said in a statement Friday, Bloomberg reported.

On Thursday, Flake heard Christine Blasey Ford maintain that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her during a 1980s party when they were both in high school. He also heard Kavanaugh issue yet another forthright denial that any such incident took place.

Flake, who is retiring at the end of this Senate term, had been a strong advocate for having Ford testify before the committee.

“Yesterday, we heard compelling testimony from Dr. Ford, as well as a persuasive response from Judge Kavanaugh,” Flake said in a statement, according to CNBC.

TRENDING: Nikki Haley Just Revealed What Happened After UN Members Laughed at Trump

“I wish that I could express the confidence that some of my colleagues have conveyed about what either did or did not happen in the early 1980s, but I left the hearing yesterday with as much doubt as certainty,” he said.

Flake said the presumption of innocence “is what binds us to the rule of law.”

“While some may argue that a different standard should apply regarding the Senate’s advice and consent responsibilities, I believe that the constitution’s provisions of fairness and due process apply here as well,” he said.

“I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh,” the statement concluded.

Republicans hold a one-vote majority on the panel. No Democrat has voiced any support for Kavanaugh, who is President Donald Trump’s second Supreme Court nominee.

On Thursday after the hearing, Flake said that he had to “chase down a few things,” The Hill reported.

“It’s a tough one. She offered good testimony, and so did he,” Flake had said Thursday night, according to Fox News. “If you’re making an allegation, you want there to be some corroboration. Where is the burden? It’s like impeachment. You don’t know.”

Flake has said, however, that the time for talking and investigating was over.

“Where does this start, where does it end?” he asked. “More time, more ludicrous allegations. What does that do to the accused?”

Although Kavanaugh’s nomination is likely to make it to the Senate floor, passage there is not assured. Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine have each said they are keeping their options open.

“I am going to go home, have some dinner and have a chance to think about all that’s gone on,” Murkowski said after the hearing.

However, for some in the GOP, it is full speed ahead.

“I will be proud to vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh when the full Senate votes on his nomination in the coming days,” Kentucky Republican and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Thursday night.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.</s>COLUMBIA, S.C. — As the Senate is divided on President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court pick, so too are women across the country.

Female voices have echoed throughout the U.S. Senate this week demanding male senators justify their support for Brett Kavanaugh’s U.S. Supreme Court nomination despite an allegation of high school sexual assault.

But other women have spent hours calling Senate offices in support of Kavanaugh, condemning what they saw as an anti-Republican ploy that’s damaged not only Kavanaugh’s reputation and livelihood but also his accuser’s.

To Hannah King, a college senior from Bristol, Tennessee, Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations of a drunken attack by Kavanaugh at a 1982 party when both were in high school were jarring and scary. But while King expressed empathy for Ford, she also said she’s concerned about the timing of Ford’s allegations, which surfaced publicly only after Kavanaugh — already a federal judge — was nominated to the Supreme Court.

“It was too timely and strategic,” said King, 21. “Anything like that makes you question how true it is.”

King spoke Friday after the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to advance Kavanaugh’s nomination to the full Senate. Hours later, President Trump ordered an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh upon Republican Sen. Jeff Flake’s insistence. Flake’s demand came after two women who said they had experienced sexual assault confronted him on an elevator at the Senate and demanded he take action against Kavanaugh. Two other women besides Ford have also lodged public sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh.

“A lot of times, you cope by suppressing and forgetting,” said King, who leads the King University College Republicans. “But someone’s promotion isn’t something that should prompt someone to come forward.”

That sentiment was shared by Sarah Round, 69, a retired elementary school teacher of Newport Center, Vermont, who felt empathy for Ford but not at the expense of Kavanaugh’s reputation and future.

“Possibly something happened to her,” Round said. “But I think she embellished what happened, or she would have gone to some authority or said something about it years ago.”

Nancy Mace, the first woman to graduate from The Citadel and a Republican state representative from Daniel Island, South Carolina, said she had been sexually assaulted as a teen herself. She expressed sympathy for Ford, but said Kavanaugh deserved protection, too.

“I’m very empathetic to women who’ve been through this type of situation,” said Mace, 40. “But on the other side, we have laws in this country that protect individuals from being wrongfully accused.”

Emma Scott, an 18-year-old University of South Carolina freshman from Charleston, South Carolina, said that, while she doesn’t doubt Ford endured a trauma of some kind, she wasn’t convinced it could be tied to Kavanaugh.

“If you’re going to use sexual assault to slow somebody down, it had better be the truth,” Scott said. “Even if Brett Kavanaugh is innocent, he is still going to live with this the rest of his life.”

Mace said that she viewed the testimony as an “at all costs” effort by Democrats to win back control in Congress and possibly hold the seat open until a future Democratic president can fill it.

“Ford is political collateral, and they do not care,” Mace said.

Susan Conger, 64, a former math teacher from Augusta, Georgia, who also worked in the Reagan administration, said she turned off her television during Thursday’s hearing but has followed the news coverage of the testimony.

“Instead of watching, I decided I would be better served by praying for the people who were talking and listening,” Conger said.

Conger has spent time volunteering with her local women’s Republican club, calling the offices of senators asking them to support Kavanaugh’s nomination.

“I’m sorry that this terrible thing happened to her at the hands of someone,” Conger said. “It’s not that I think that his accuser is a bad person. It’s not my job to judge her because I don’t know her.”

Kevin Bishop, a spokesman for U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham — who gave a fiery defense of Kavanaugh after the judge’s testimony Thursday — said Graham’s office has received as many women calling in support of Kavanaugh as in opposition.

Round, of Vermont, said she feels the whole episode could end up hurting Democrats more than helping them in this fall’s elections, just more than a month away.

“I am digging my heels in, and I’m hoping that a lot of conservatives are determined to vote Republican,” Round said. “I think it’s galvanized the women on the right more than it’s galvanized the women on the left.”
The FBI reaches out to Deborah Ramirez, the second woman to publicly accuse Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, as part of the investigations into allegations against Kavanaugh.