Questions about Amy Coney Barrett’s beliefs don’t demonstrate Anti-Catholic Bias

Conservatives would have you believe that questioning any aspect of Amy Coney Barrett’s faith demonstrates some kind of anti-Catholic bias. But it ain’t so. Consider this meme (below), which was circulating on Facebook:

If, rather than being Catholic, Amy Coney Barrett was a devoted Muslim woman who belonged to an extremist Muslim organization that demanded a lifelong covenant, professed a belief that women should be subservient to their husbands, taught at a madrassa, and once said she viewed her participation in the legal profession as a way to bring about the kingdom of Allah . . . the conversation surrounding her appointment to the United States Supreme Court would be very different.
Meme about Amy Coney Barrett

I think we all know that this is true. So, it’s not anti-Catholic bias to ask questions about her belief system.

First, let’s provide a little bit of context: as anyone who follows the court closely knows, Judge Amy would be the sixth Catholic on the court. The current composition of the court includes Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, and Brett Kavanaugh, all of whom are Catholic; Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, who are Jewish; and Neil Gorsuch, who was raised a Catholic but now attends a Protestant church.1

Not an atheist among them.2

The Republican Senate, of course, having thrown any kind of principle aside, is barreling ahead, determined to get Coney Barrett onto the court before the election. They are starting hearings this morning (Columbus Day or Indigenous People’s Day, depending on your point of view) even though two of the Republican Senators on the Committee (Mike Lee R-Utah and Thom Tillis, R-N.C.) have been diagnosed with Covid-19. In addition, there are questions about whether Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.), the Committee chairman has tested negative.

Doesn’t matter.

The Republicans will adhere to their very tight schedule, which essentially can allow for no deviations.

They have the votes, so they know they can get her confirmed. But their commitment to pure power politics is an open invitation to the Democrats to engage in court packing when they have the chance.3

Biden and Harris have (not surprisingly) been reluctant to address whether they would be in support of court packing. And there is good reason to be concerned. It would set a dangerous precedent.

There is another possibility which the Democrats should consider: impeach Brett Kavanaugh for lying to Congress in his official testimony.

Since those hearings, various news sources have followed up on the various allegations that both Christine Blasey-Ford and other women had made against Kavanaugh, and it appears that those allegations have legs. There is plenty of evidence that Kavanaugh lied to Congress, which would, of course, be perjury.

And boy would that make Republicans mental.

But it wouldn’t be court packing, and it would be a legitimate inquiry, and a legitimate use of the impeachment power.

And boy would that make Republicans mental.

And that alone might be reason enough to do it.

  1. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whose seat is being replaced, was Jewish.
  2. People who are culturally Jewish are not always religiously Jewish, and it’s unclear to me whether the Jewish justices actually believe in God.
  3. And they might have that chance as early as next year if Biden is elected and the Senate flips Democratic.

About a1skeptic

A disturbed citizen and skeptic. I should stop reading the newspaper. Or watching TV. I should turn off NPR and disconnect from the Internet. We’d all be better off.
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.