You scratch a progressive and you find an fascist. That has been the lesson learned from the Hobby Lobby decision. One of the most notable bits of fascist commentary appeared in the Huffington Post by an anti-religious bigot named Ronald A. Lindsay, The Uncomfortable Question: Should We Have Six Catholic Justices on the Supreme Court?
if people have a problem with the Supreme Court ruling, it shouldn’t be because of the religion of the men and women on the court. Complain, if you like, that the court is too conservative; argue about the fact that there aren’t enough Democrats, or that there are too many Republicans, or that there are too many justices who have ideologies with which you disagree, or whatever. But don’t blame it on someone’s religion. Besides being a form of bigotry, that’s just cowardly and un-American.
Besides: anyone who thinks Catholics hold a monolithic view about contraception—and that every person in the pew is automatically opposed to it—has not been paying attention to polls. Put a Catholic on the court and there’s no telling what they’ll believe, or what you’ll get it.
So the question asked in the article should be uncomfortable, not because you are asking a big-brained question but because you show yourself to be an imbecile. But we would also have the right to ask is it fair that a third of the Court is Jewish when they are only 2% of the population? How about two “unmarried” women on the court? Do “unmarried” women rate their own justice? What about “unmarried” men… now that Souter is retired? How about one sorta dense Latina? I know the mediocre need representation but do the last couple of sigmas on the intelligence curve also need their own justice?