The point is NOT "bible believers in public office". It is "religious policies injected into the dialogue of the commons". If Scalia is allowing his private religious convictions to color or warp his sense of justice under the Constitution, he is hardly suited for the job. The great principle of the Constitution is that there should be NO religious test (one way or the other) for public office, and likewise that there should be NO mixing of religion and state issues.

Everyone may have a different deiity, but the nation has only one majority at any moment. It is impossible to derive justice from so many deities, but it can work to derive it from clearly established fundamental laws and the will of the individuals taken collectively. That's what a democratic republic does.

A