{"id":2656,"date":"2014-07-08T11:59:39","date_gmt":"2014-07-08T16:59:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/?p=2656"},"modified":"2014-07-08T11:07:19","modified_gmt":"2014-07-08T16:07:19","slug":"chart-of-the-week-scotus-breakdown-by-faith","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/2014\/07\/08\/chart-of-the-week-scotus-breakdown-by-faith\/","title":{"rendered":"Chart of the Week &#8211; SCOTUS breakdown by faith"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_2657\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-2657\" style=\"width: 911px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/files\/2014\/07\/RB_SCOTUS.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-2657\" alt=\"Via Nyshtick\" src=\"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/files\/2014\/07\/RB_SCOTUS.png\" width=\"911\" height=\"664\" srcset=\"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/files\/2014\/07\/RB_SCOTUS.png 911w, https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/files\/2014\/07\/RB_SCOTUS-300x218.png 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 911px) 100vw, 911px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-2657\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Via <a href=\"http:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/dataisbeautiful\/comments\/1zt6o9\/religious_breakdown_of_the_united_states_supreme\/\">Nyshtick<\/a>\u00a0at <a href=\"http:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/dataisbeautiful\/\">dataisbeautiful<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>It seems a case of peculiarly unfortunate timing that after the Supreme Pontiff went one way in <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Humanae_vitae\" target=\"_blank\">1968<\/a>\u00a0and the\u00a0Supreme Court went completely the other way in <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Roe_v._Wade\" target=\"_blank\">1973<\/a>,\u00a0the latter institution was gradually but effectively packed with devotees\u00a0from the former. This has lead us, rather recently, to a situation in which the highest court in the land has been making rulings which seem to follow <em>Human\u00e6 Vit\u00e6<\/em> more closely than they do the\u00a0line of cases starting with <em>Griswold v. Connecticut<\/em>.<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"twitter-tweet\" data-width=\"500\" data-dnt=\"true\">\n<p lang=\"en\" dir=\"ltr\">In the following photo of the conservative voting bloc on SCOTUS, I have circled all of the non-Catholics in blue \u2014 <a href=\"http:\/\/t.co\/tvsmn59SXW\">pic.twitter.com\/tvsmn59SXW<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&mdash; Blue Ball Skeptics (@BlueBallSkeptic) <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/BlueBallSkeptic\/status\/484052267771768832?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw\">July 1, 2014<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><script async src=\"https:\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script><\/p>\n<p>As much as I&#8217;d like to believe\u00a0it is just an unfortunate coincidence that the conservative anti-contraception wing of the Supreme Court is entirely Roman Catholic, you don&#8217;t have to be a hardcore skeptic to harbour grave doubts on that point. The predictive algorithm on reproductive rights has become all too simple:<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"twitter-tweet\" data-width=\"500\" data-dnt=\"true\">\n<p lang=\"en\" dir=\"ltr\">Sorting heuristic for SCOTUS on reproductive choice for women: All the Roman Catholics will vote against it, except the one who is a woman.<\/p>\n<p>&mdash; Blue Ball Skeptics (@BlueBallSkeptic) <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/BlueBallSkeptic\/status\/484038559372820481?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw\">July 1, 2014<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><script async src=\"https:\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script><\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;m not sure what the answer is to this ongoing problem. Obviously, the idea of an implicit religious test doesn&#8217;t sit too well with the &#8220;no religious test&#8221; <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/No_religious_test\">clause<\/a>, which happens to be one of my favorite bits of the entire Constitution.\u00a0Nevertheless, I do find it disturbing that the only branch of Christianity which historically has been at least somewhat\u00a0comfortable with allowing women some semblance of reproductive self-determination is completely unrepresented in the institution that historically holds the most sway on such issues here in the U.S.<\/p>\n<p>To quote <a href=\"http:\/\/abcnews.go.com\/Politics\/Supreme_Court\/elena-kagans-confirmation-supreme-court-protestant-justices-time\/story?id=10605688\" target=\"_blank\">Jeffrey Rosen<\/a>, &#8220;[I]t&#8217;s a fascinating truth that we&#8217;ve allowed religion to drop out of consideration on the Supreme Court, and right now, we have a Supreme Court that religiously at least, by no means looks like America.&#8221; I have to wonder whether we can really call this particular demographic skewness a form of progress.<\/p>\n<p>Your thoughts?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It seems a case of peculiarly unfortunate timing that after the Supreme Pontiff went one way in 1968\u00a0and the\u00a0Supreme Court&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":23,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18,11,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2656","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-damned-lies-and-statistics","category-movement","category-theocracy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2656","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/23"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2656"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2656\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2662,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2656\/revisions\/2662"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2656"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2656"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/backgroundprobability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2656"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}