I think that the biggest "fight" we would ever see would be all of the evangelicals arguing over whose interpretation of the Bible we'd use.

 

I was at a family event where someone was bit by a dog. There were FIVE doctors at the party. I imagine the discussion of how best to treat the wound would go about as politely.

Obviously' date=' the Bible and church teaching are being used as a basis for decision-making by the conservative Catholics on the court. Scalia has a son who's a priest. Thomas studied for the priesthood for a while at Conception Junction, Mo. The larger problem is that with five Catholic conservatives on the high court ... who all went to Harvard or Yale ... there's a serious, and I believe deliberate, lack of diversity on the high court.[/quote']

 

Deliberate by who?

Obviously, the Bible and church teaching are being used as a basis for decision-making by the conservative Catholics on the court. Scalia has a son who's a priest. Thomas studied for the priesthood for a while at Conception Junction, Mo.

 

The larger problem is that with five Catholic conservatives on the high court ... who all went to Harvard or Yale ... there's a serious, and I believe deliberate, lack of diversity on the high court.

 

If we are to error on the side of liberal or conservative, I'd prefer my judges a little conservative. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. However, I don't want them far right at all.

Deliberate by who?

By Republican presidents and their political advisers. They know that nominating conservative Catholics to the Supreme Court is a pretty safe bet for Senate confirmation. If the Dems wish to attack a Scalia or an Alito, they risk alienating Catholic voters, who presently are split about 50-50 nationally between the two parties. In other words, there's a reason that two-thirds of the high court is Roman Catholic.

I think that the biggest "fight" we would ever see would be all of the evangelicals arguing over whose interpretation of the Bible we'd use.

 

And this is my sole reason for not being for the SCOTUS using the Bible for their rulings.

Deliberate by who?

 

Apparently the last 3 Presidents and Congress. Didn't Obama nominate 3 of them?

If we are to error on the side of liberal or conservative, I'd prefer my judges a little conservative. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. However, I don't want them far right at all.

Just last week Scalia told his granddaughter's Christian school graduating class that the earth is only about 5,000 years old.

 

As far as your last sentence, I often wonder who's more on the fringe ... Thomas/Scalia/Alito or the three female justices on the other side. Which group is closer to "mainstream thought"?

Which group is closer to "mainstream thought"?

 

None of them.

 

Roberts & Kennedy are the most mainstream justices IMO.

None of them.

 

Roberts & Kennedy are the most mainstream justices IMO.

You might well be right. So what's taken place over the past quarter-century or so is political gamesmanship: You nominate Scalia, we'll nominate Ginsburg. You nominate Thomas/Alito, we'll nominate someone just as extreme on the other side. Which makes Kennedy perhaps the second most powerful man in D.C.

Obviously, the Bible and church teaching are being used as a basis for decision-making by the conservative Catholics on the court. Scalia has a son who's a priest. Thomas studied for the priesthood for a while at Conception Junction, Mo.

 

The larger problem is that with five Catholic conservatives on the high court ... who all went to Harvard or Yale ... there's a serious, and I believe deliberate, lack of diversity on the high court.

 

Do the three liberal Jewish justices concern you with their lack of diversity?

Which makes Kennedy perhaps the second most powerful man in D.C.

 

No doubt in my mind. Maybe the most powerful in some instances.

 

Who nominated Kennedy?

No doubt in my mind. Maybe the most powerful in some instances.

 

Who nominated Kennedy?

 

Reagan.

Reagan.

 

Jeez. I didn't realize he'd been on there so long.

Do the three liberal Jewish justices concern you with their lack of diversity?

Yes. The court is made up of six Roman Catholics and three Jews. No Protestants, no evangelicals, no people who list their religious affiliation as "none," no atheists. Harvard and Yale every one. Appointed for life.

 

The bigger problem is that too many issues are viewed through just a handful of prisms.

Here's a good article showing the ruling tendencies of the current 9 justices. Not surprisingly, Kennedy is to the middle of the other 8, but he does more often agree with Roberts/Thomas/Scalia/Alito than he does Breyer/Sotomayor/Ginsburg/Kagan.

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/06/24/upshot/24up-scotus-agreement-rates.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0