"When Justice Stevens retires, it is entirely possible that there will
be no Protestant justices on the Court, for the first time ever."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125641988
![[chart]](http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t:35,19,13,12,10,7,16&chs=300x92&chl=Episcopalian:+35%7CPresbyterian:+19%7COther+Protestant:+13%7CCatholic:+12%7CUnitarian:+10%7CJewish:+7%7COther:%2016&chco=d8472b,e38d2c,efc637,92bd7e,17807e,51aade,999999)
For the first time ever, there may not be a protestant judge? Goodness NOOOOOOOOO! Is there really that big of a difference between Protestant, Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Evangelical Free, etc? Jesus died on the cross for your sins, accept him into your heart, and eternal life shall be yours. And....done. From my experience, this pretty much sums up the heart and soul of the message found within the doctrines of these various denominations.
Though America has yet to face this issue until now, what is the significance of this? Where is the psychology in this? If you read the article, you will see how nearly every person quoted, and each expert opinion given determines that a potential supreme court judiciary candidate's religious affiliation should not affect the decision of their appointment.
Yet it remains a talking point. Why? Because religious views influence our methods of decision making. Short of finding food, shelter, water, and procreation, nearly every single human activity is constructed. Beliefs, morals, ethics, traditions, and perspectives are not prerequisites for basic human needs.
With that said, it would seem that religion is fundamentally important in this situation, as it must influence interpretations of the Constitution, yes? While I would like to think that appointed leaders (for whom the common citizen is NOT allowed to vote for) can "turn off" their religious switch, social psychological research has demonstrated time after time how attitudes, beliefs, and life experiences influence behavior, whether conscious or unconscious.
With THAT said, what's with the homogeneous religious affiliation of current Supreme Court Justices? If there is anything the natural laws that govern the planet have taught us its that in diversity there is security. Wouldn't increasing racial, cultural, ethnic, gender, and religious diversity on the Supreme Court demonstrate our leaders' progressive ideals?
I look forward to the day when it is not uncommon to find Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, and Shinto men and women working together to make decisions that affect all Americans...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125641988
For the first time ever, there may not be a protestant judge? Goodness NOOOOOOOOO! Is there really that big of a difference between Protestant, Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Evangelical Free, etc? Jesus died on the cross for your sins, accept him into your heart, and eternal life shall be yours. And....done. From my experience, this pretty much sums up the heart and soul of the message found within the doctrines of these various denominations.
Though America has yet to face this issue until now, what is the significance of this? Where is the psychology in this? If you read the article, you will see how nearly every person quoted, and each expert opinion given determines that a potential supreme court judiciary candidate's religious affiliation should not affect the decision of their appointment.
Yet it remains a talking point. Why? Because religious views influence our methods of decision making. Short of finding food, shelter, water, and procreation, nearly every single human activity is constructed. Beliefs, morals, ethics, traditions, and perspectives are not prerequisites for basic human needs.
With that said, it would seem that religion is fundamentally important in this situation, as it must influence interpretations of the Constitution, yes? While I would like to think that appointed leaders (for whom the common citizen is NOT allowed to vote for) can "turn off" their religious switch, social psychological research has demonstrated time after time how attitudes, beliefs, and life experiences influence behavior, whether conscious or unconscious.
With THAT said, what's with the homogeneous religious affiliation of current Supreme Court Justices? If there is anything the natural laws that govern the planet have taught us its that in diversity there is security. Wouldn't increasing racial, cultural, ethnic, gender, and religious diversity on the Supreme Court demonstrate our leaders' progressive ideals?
I look forward to the day when it is not uncommon to find Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, and Shinto men and women working together to make decisions that affect all Americans...
Leave a comment