Geoffrey Stone’s recent controversial blog post, blaming the partial-birth abortion decision on the Catholicism of the majority justices, has been mentioned in the Washington Post:
“What then explains this decision?” he wrote. “Here is a painfully awkward observation: All five justices in the majority in Gonzales are Catholic. The four justices who are either Protestant or Jewish all voted in accord with settled precedent. It is mortifying to have to point this out.”
In finding that there was a moral reason for upholding the ban, Stone added, the majority failed “to respect the fundamental difference between religious belief and morality.”
Stone was immediately hooted down, blogospherically, for faulty logic, “religious bigotry” and failing to note anything from the majority opinion that would indicate the justices relied on religious belief, rather than their interpretation of the law, to uphold the ban passed by Congress in 2002. That ban, they noted, was approved by substantial and bipartisan majorities, made up of Catholics and non-Catholics.
I’m proud to have been among the crowd hooting down Stone.
John Yoo takes the hooting to the Wall Street Journal here.