Wednesday, October 12, 2005

A RELIGIOUS TEST? Does this president have even a rudimentary respect for the separation of church and state?"

www.AndrewSullivan.com - Daily Dish: "A RELIGIOUS TEST?

If we are to construe that part of the rationale for the Miers nomination is her religious faith, then the nomination does indeed appear to be unconstitutional. An added irony is that the woman she would replace would be among the most opposed to such a test, as an alert reader has pointed out. In her concurring opinion in Wallace v. Jaffree, 1985, Sandra Day O'Connor wrote

'In my view, the Religion Clauses - the Free Exercise Clause, the Establishment Clause, the Religious Test Clause, Art. VI, cl. 3, and the Equal Protection Clause as applied to religion - all speak with one voice on this point: absent the most unusual circumstances, one's religion ought not affect one's legal rights or duties or benefits. As I have previously noted, 'the Establishment Clause is infringed when the government makes adherence to religion relevant to a person's standing in the political community.' Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 69 (1985) (O'CONNOR, J., concurring in judgment).'

My emphasis. Didn't the president just make 'adherence to religion relevant to a person's standing in the political community'? Does this president have even a rudimentary respect for the separation of church and state?"

No comments: