Let's suppose I were a member of the Datholic religion, one with a long and venerated history. Church doctrine of my particular religion clearly came down against women's suffrage and any participation by women in government. In fact, the head of my church, the Tope, came out very strongly against women voting, and in fact decreed that all Datholic members of government, to remain in good standing, must fight to end the immorality of female political participation in all its forms. Now, it's true that not all Datholics followed this particular doctrine, and definitely true that not all Datholics who followed it personally felt that the State should actually outlaw it. But, nonetheless the Tope thought this one was pretty important.
And me, being a 50 year old judge being nominated to the federal bench, had made it clear in numerous writings that I personally felt that it was abomination for women to be allowed to vote or play any role in legislative or judicial leadership positions of any sort. And, in my past as a judge I'd made some rather bizarre rulings with respect to employment gender discrimination suits filed by women against state and local governments. In addition, I'd made it fairly clear that I felt that God's law trumped that of the State. These two points together demonstrating to reasonable observers that I would be incapable of making legal rulings based on the law instead of my own religious beliefs.
Would it be appropriate to claim that people objecting to my nomination were discriminating against Datholics in government?
