But gay groups can meet there and preach their agenda, feminists can preach theirs, atheists can preach theirs, but the Christian agenda is silenced. That is not freedom of religion, that is censorship.
I also see this as a result of all the conservatives on the bench being Catholics. No offense, but Catholic conservatives are different than Protestant ones. We need some non-Catholic conservative voices there, not to substitute their values for the Constitution, but to to approach it from a different mindset. “Catholic Guilt” sometimes plays out similar to “Jewicide”.
“I also see this as a result of all the conservatives on the bench
being Catholics.”
I don’t know if that’s really an operative factor (or not).
My suspicion is that there was some sort of factor of the cases
sent up to the USSC that just didn’t present itself as a good “test case”
for review.
It’s amazing the reasons (real or manufactured) that judges can
bring up in order to ignore or intervene in a case.
But I am disappointed that the current cases weren’t taken on for review.
Even if the conservatives on the court (some of Catholic faith)
had a hand in declining to review...
I’m still happy to have those judges of Catholic faith/background
on the bench...
rather than some of the MUCH UGLIER alternatives.
Just my opinion.