Miers...The religious test

After his horrible Plamegate column the other day Richard Cohen tries to make amends with a decent column on Harriet Miers, Miers: Faithful to Whom?, and brings up the point that I've been trying to make, Miers is a Bush cultist.

The only thing that commends her at the moment is a touching fealty to the extended Bush family and what Bush mentioned: her religion. But this is a narrow recommendation.

While religion should not be a test for political office or the Supreme Court the religion she is part of forces us to make it one. The the Valley View Christian Church in Dallas to which she belongs is a fundamentalist church that like most of the radical christian churches can't keep there religious beliefs out of the secular business of the state. This has to be a concern.

The theology that Miers represents can hardly be called progressive. It is one that entails all sorts of conservative political positions and says something about the believer. For instance, when Rove offered his oral wink to Dobson, was he saying that Miers is opposed to stem cell research and abortion under (almost) any circumstance? Was he saying that she opposes the teaching of evolution in public schools or "balancing" it with "intelligent design"? Was Rove telling Dobson that Miers thinks this is a Christian nation, that religious symbols can be and ought to be in the schools or other public places? Can the government fund churches? Can military chaplains proselytize the unchurched? Should gays be "reprogrammed," and should the government recommend only abstinence as a way to avoid teenage pregnancy? These are all positions taken by many fundamentalist religious leaders. Are they Miers's? Is anyone going to ask?

This is dicey stuff, and it crosses a line that probably should not be crossed. But the president has stupidly opened a Pandora's box -- and all sorts of ugly questions may pop out. Can Miers set her beliefs aside? Will the law take precedence? When it comes time to argue a case, will she simply say "I believe what I believe -- and that's all there is to it." I kind of doubt it, but I would like to be reassured. Bush has done his nominee no favor -- especially to suggest that one closed mind has recommended another.

I am truly hoping that the statements and actions of the Democrats in the Senate is part of some grand plan and they will end up opposing Miers, I hope!

Cohen also points out that there is absolutely nothing in her legal career that would qualify her for a seat on the Supreme Court. Of course in this administration a lack of qualifications has become a qualification.