Up or Down - Religion, Filibusters, & Judges

Chuck Colson, former Nixon Administration official and founder and chairman of Prison Fellowship Ministries, writes about how religion came to be a part of the filibuster debate:

Never before in American history have judges been filibustered. They’ve always been given an up or down vote under the advice and consent clause of the Constitution. But a minority in the Senate is blocking good, decent, well-qualified judges simply because of ideology: They are strict constructionists. This is an outrage, and we need to express that outrage vigorously—now.

Let me clarify two things that cloud the debate. First of all, those of us who are Christian are being told that we are using religion against our opponents. It has been said repeatedly in the press and by various senators that those of us who have been advocating that the Senate change its rules and bring these judges to a vote are impugning the religious faith of the senators blocking the vote, of saying that opposition senators are not as good Christians as we are.

Now, let me tell you something: I’ve been in Washington most of my life, and this may be the most preposterous charge I have ever heard. I reread what people have said in this debate, and no one has challenged the faith of anybody on the other side—not Ted Kennedy or Joseph Biden or Harry Reid. And to accuse us of doing so is nothing but a smear.

The other side of that coin is that we are being told that as people of faith we have no place in the debate. I suppose they think it is okay for us to speak out as citizens, but if we talk from a faith perspective, we are perverting or corrupting the political system.

***
The senators are claiming that they’re trying to keep ideologues off the bench. But isn’t it interesting that all these so-called “ideologues” are pro-life and pro-family?

So, who is using religion? Not Christian groups who are rallying the Senate to vote. It’s those trying to discredit judicial nominees. They are applying a religious test for office, something the Constitution specifically prohibits.

My Comments:
I'm not really sure why the Republicans aren't hammering the "who's playing the religion card?" thing a little more vigorously by focusing on the confirmation hearings of William Pryor, wherein we got to see the "Schumer Doctrine" on full display.

How many Democrat Senators commented on Pryor's "deeply held [Catholic] beliefs" as disqualifying from sitting on the federal judiciary?

Again, which side is using religion against the other side?