I never said REMOVING from the public square.
I said promoting someone's Christian beliefs has never heretofore been used as a QUALIFICATION to sit on the bench.
Qualification to sit on the bench previously was their knowledge/understanding/interpretation/alliance with the constitution/states rights positions/affirmative action stance, etc.
In Miers, she is "best" not because of those real qualifications, but because......she's a woman, she's a Christian, she supports affirmative action.....just to name a few.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1507223/posts
For those who were wondering about her positions on quotas etc..
In Miers, she is "best" not because of those real qualifications, but because......she's a woman, she's a Christian, she supports affirmative action.....just to name a few.
The Constitution is mute on what qualifications the President must use to pick his nominee. Can't you see that it is YOUR OWN bias that only you know the "real qualifications?"
You sound like the Dems wailing for "REAL campaign finance reform," like they were the arbiters of what is REAL.
The President decided he wanted a Christian woman who he knew well on the Court. IMHO, the atheist right and the atheist left are the factions that form a coalition against this pick.