They could just as easily have been 5 liberal Roman Catholic judges, Dave. What makes the difference is they were appointed by conservative, Protestant presidents. Love America where your merit, not race or creed, is the measure (at least when conservatives like Reagan and Bush are the executive).
Thank God for conservative Catholic judges. Liberal Protestant judges are what brought us the blessing of legal abortion. When Roe v. Wade came about in January 1973, and the court voted 7-2 to legalize abortion, this was its religious composition:
Potter Stewart ---- Episcopal
Thurgood Marshall ---- Episcopal
William O. Douglas ---- Presbyterian
Warren E. Burger ---- Presbyterian
Lewis Powell ---- Presbyterian
Harry Blackmun ---- Methodist
William J. Brennan ---- Catholic
Byron R. White [opposed] ---- Episcopal
William H. Rehnquist [opposed] ---- Lutheran
The point is they needed a Christian who is a legit legal scholar. One that can not only hold onto his faith but integrate it with his legal theory and defend it rationally. They tried to find protestants that could do this but in the end turned to Catholics over and over. That says something. Mixing religion and deep thinking is much easier to do as a Catholic.
It's the glory of Protestantism that it doesn't discriminate against Roman Catholics, especially after the history of oppression and tyranny Protestants came out of to found this great nation the United States of America.
And the main defining divide in all Christian denominations and branches is that between liberal and conversative. Yes, there are many liberal Protestants, but there are equally many liberal Roman Catholics.
What is the status of abortion in Italy or France or even Ireland nowadays?
And how helpful is it, regarding such issues as abortion, when Roman Catholics continue to vote for the Ted Kennedys and John Kerrys of the American political scene?
Starting with Reagan conservative Protestant presidents nominated conservative Catholic judges as a way to get conservative judges through the nominating process to begin with. It's more difficult for liberal senators to deny a Catholic nominee than to deny a conservative Protestant nominee. It's poltics, and it's worked for the cause of conservatism.
Abortion is illegal in Ireland. It's one of the few civilized countries left in the western world.
I remember when justice Scalia was up for nomination. When I learned he was a practicing Catholic with about 8 children, intuitively I knew he would be a good one. I was correct.
William Prior, Edith Jones, Janice Rogers Brown, and Karen Williams are evangelical justices who have been mentioned as possible supreme court picks in the past (there are also a couple of others whose names I forget). Edith Jones was Bush 1.0 second choice behind the mistake of justice Souter.
Prior, Brown, and Jones would unconfirmable in today's political environment. Karen Williams is still mentioned as a possibility, but sadly she also might be unconfirmable.
It is a small step in the right direction, this is true. In my view, a key principle that needs to be assaulted is the notion of stare decisis and the perverted notion of common law jurisprudence that supporters of RvW make to try and justify their position. For those who are interested, I wrote a piece for this year's "celebration" of RvW on these very subjects which can be read here:
On Fundamental Rights, Common Law Principles, and Abortion
Commenting by HaloScan
