So many things drive me nuts. But make me pick only one and it’ll be religious zealotry in any court, but especially on the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
Before Scalia died, I read with fury remarks he made over the years during his “private” speeches–remarks that proclaimed his Catholic faith with at least the strong suggestion he didn’t think he needed to remove his religious convictions from his judicial ones.<\/p>\n
Many legal pundits preceded the word “Scalia” with the word “brilliant.” To me, anyone who avidly professes a religious faith is not brilliant. Any mind that occupies itself with the concerns of god is not available to occupy itself with the complex concerns of humanity.<\/p>\n
OK, Scalia’s dead. But for anyone like me–so secular I don’t even call myself an atheist; I’m nothing that can be described with any religious terminology–watching religion seep into and pollute our separation-of-church-and-state foundation is…well, you can come up with some powerful word to describe it. Something like a0[pwe95 7q93Q YUVHB;SF UI!!!!<\/p>\n
Thus, I give you an article from the newsletter of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Patheos, on this same subject:<\/p>\n
Red Mass sounds like an unfortunate medical condition. Sadly, it\u2019s worse. Red mass is a condition that plagues our body politic.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Source, Patheos: Black robes at the Red Mass: the undesirable religiosity of Supreme Court justices<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n
P.S. I yearn for the day when a politician running for office does not<\/em> say “God bless America” after speeches. And when challenged about a belief in supernature says, “Thanks to the Constitution and the First Amendment, that is none of your fucking business.” Well, maybe leave out “fucking.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
So many things drive me nuts. But make me pick only one and it’ll be religious zealotry in any court, but especially on the Supreme Court. Before Scalia died, I read with fury remarks he made over the years during … Continue reading