Rove Speaks, FRC Listens
Looks like Tony Perkins at the Family Research Council got Karl Rove's message loud and clear:

Last night, President Bush was questioned about comments made by the Family Research Council and its President, Tony Perkins, regarding the fight to end the unconstitutional judicial filibuster by the current minority party.

The following is Tony Perkins' response:

"We have never said that Democrats aren't people of faith, in fact, we have specifically stated that our single purpose on this issue is to obtain an up-or-down vote on President Bush's judicial nominees. It's that simple. These nominees deserve to be voted on one way or another so they can move ahead with their lives and good works in whatever capacity that may be.

"We did not make this issue about religion. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) and others like him have twisted this issue and manipulated our words for the advancement of their own agenda. Senator Schumer specifically stated that a key nominee was not qualified to sit on the second highest court in the nation because of his 'deeply held personal beliefs,' please note he did not say because of his 'judicial philosophy.'

"I agree with President Bush, religion is a private matter. We do not hold people's chosen faith or even their lack of faith against them. The way that people choose or choose not to worship is their own decision; but for nominees to be held back from opportunity because they have chosen a faith that might advise against abortion, same-sex 'marriage' and similar issues is deplorable. The Senate's job, according to the Constitution is to 'advice and consent' not obstruct and filibuster."

We did not make this issue about religion.??? What a liar. Ladies and Gentlemen, I bring you Albert Mohler, key speaker at Injustice Sunday:

"We are not calling for people to be moral, we want them to be believers in the Lord Jesus Christ."

As Salon's Michelle Goldberg put it, That's a valid position for a religious figure to take, perhaps, but since Mohler also argued that Christians can't separate their public responsibilities from their spiritual obligations, it seemed as if he was arguing for the right of judges to impose Christianity. If so, the real problem isn't discrimination against "people of faith." It's the claim that "people of faith" have the right to discriminate.
- posted by TJ @ 4:11 PM