# Why no Atheists on the Supreme Court? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 10, 2010, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915 "2010-05-10T15:01:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/21 "2010-05-11T03:01:16Z")
Depends. A lot of “Jews” are only so culturally and ethnically-many are de facto agnostics or atheists in the sense they do not believe in God, the soul, and/or the afterlife. What branches of Judaism are the Jewish Supreme Court Judges? ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/22 "2010-05-11T03:46:31Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > A lot of “Jews” are only so culturally and ethnically-many are de facto agnostics or atheists in the sense they do not believe in God, the soul, and/or the afterlife. The same can be said for a lot of “Christians”. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/23 "2010-05-11T03:52:07Z")
> [@Clu-Me-In](#): > > Has there ever been a known Atheist on the Supreme Court? [Felix Frankfurter](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Frankfurter), maybe? > [@](#): > > Frankfurter himself was a non-practicing Jew, and regarded religion as “an accident of birth”. That’s not exactly a proclamation of atheism, but pretty close. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/24 "2010-05-11T03:59:48Z")
> [@Clu-Me-In](#): > > \*\* Why no Atheists on the Supreme Court?\*\* Because the Supreme Court **is** God! DUH! ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/25 "2010-05-11T04:00:56Z")
> [@spoke-](#): > > [Felix Frankfurter](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Frankfurter), maybe? OK, but why aren’t there **more** singing transvestite bisexual mad scientists on the SCOTUS? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/26 "2010-05-11T04:36:13Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > OK, but why aren’t there **more** singing transvestite bisexual mad scientists on the SCOTUS? Isn’t three enough? ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/27 "2010-05-11T05:27:18Z")
> [@Mr.Excellent](#): > > Consider that anyone who’s a realistic candidate for the Court now would probably have been born no later than the 1950s - Elena Kagan disagrees. By about 4 months. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/28 "2010-05-11T08:10:08Z")
Spam reported. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/29 "2010-05-11T14:45:37Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Elena Kagan disagrees. By about 4 months. > 😛 D’oh! Good catch. It’s still 2009 in my head. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/30 "2010-05-11T15:02:02Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I doubt that a president would take such a gamble as to nominate a vocally open atheist in the first place, though. I doubt that a president would nominate someone who was openly hostile toward religion in general or toward any of America’s major religions in particular. Which would rule out some, but by no means all, vocally open atheists. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/31 "2010-05-11T15:13:15Z")
I’d like to see it happen, if only to push the question of religion and government into a more open light. “You can’t appoint him/her! They’re an atheist! They don’t believe in God!” “Why does that matter for a public service position?” It’s tougher to force that discussion with an election, since people can vote or not vote for someone for any reason they please, but an appointed position would be stickier. I’d _really_ like to see the contortions the talking heads make in order to justify why it matters. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/32 "2010-05-11T15:49:04Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > I doubt that a president would nominate someone who was openly hostile toward religion in general or toward any of America’s major religions in particular. Which would rule out some, but by no means all, vocally open atheists. Yeah, because Atheists are hostile to religion. Not the people who think that if you don’t follow their religion you are going to burn in hell for eternity, they aren’t hostile to any of the major religions - as long as it’s their own. Christians are never hostile to Jews and Muslims, and Muslims aren’t hostile to Christians and Jews, and Jews don’t think that God is theirs exclusively as the chosen people. Nope, it’s the Atheists that are hostile to religion. ETA: Because not believing in something is the same as being hostile. That’s why there is all the hostility towards Santa Clause and the Loch Ness Monster. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/33 "2010-05-11T16:32:11Z")
> [@Clu-Me-In](#): > > Protestants, Catholics and Jews are pretty much cut from the same cloth. I’d have to believe that for one to vote to uphold Roe V Wade, they can’t seriously consider themselves believers. This is the most nonsensical thing I read today, and I read one of Orly Taitz’ pleadings this morning. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/34 "2010-05-11T17:18:54Z")
Do we even know that, just to pick a couple of examples, Justice Ginsburg goes to temple, or Justice Kennedy to Mass? For that matter, did Justice Stevens go to services? Identifying oneself consistently with one’s ethnicity or the faith in which one was raised does not necessarily mean one is a believer. > [@DanBlather](#): > > ETA: Because not believing in something is the same as being hostile. That’s probably why he said “some, but not all.” 😉 ---
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/35 "2010-05-11T17:48:39Z")
> [@Tom\_Tildrum](#): > > Do we even know that, just to pick a couple of examples, Justice Ginsburg goes to temple, or Justice Kennedy to Mass? For that matter, did Justice Stevens go to services? Identifying oneself consistently with one’s ethnicity or the faith in which one was raised does not necessarily mean one is a believer. And not going to religious services is not necessarily an indication of a lack of belief. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2010, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/36 "2010-05-11T19:45:56Z")
> [@Clu-Me-In](#): > > Protestants, Catholics and Jews are pretty much cut from the same cloth. I’d have to believe that for one to vote to uphold Roe V Wade, they can’t seriously consider themselves believers. And you’d be wrong. I am not a hundred feet away from a pair of believers who firmly support abortion rights. ---
**Author:** ![jebert](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ec9cab/32.png) [@jebert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jebert)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/37 "2010-05-12T02:19:47Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > I’d like to see it happen, if only to push the question of religion and government into a more open light. > > “You can’t appoint him/her! They’re an atheist! They don’t believe in God!” > “Why does that matter for a public service position?” > > It’s tougher to force that discussion with an election, since people can vote or not vote for someone for any reason they please, but an appointed position would be stickier. I’d _really_ like to see the contortions the talking heads make in order to justify why it matters. Appointed vs elected is key. There are quite possibly atheist members of Congress, but I’d expect darned few, especially within the last 20 years when religion and politics seem to have become more entwined. Can anyone point to a recent Senator or Congressman who has openly declared to be an atheist? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/38 "2010-05-12T03:20:40Z")
> [@Wilbo523](#): > > You are very naive, in your understanding of people of faith. And, more importantly, of the role of judges. ---
**Author:** ![Suburban\_Plankton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/suburban_plankton/32/219_2.png) [@Suburban\_Plankton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suburban_Plankton)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/39 "2010-05-12T03:52:58Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > > [@Clu-Me-In](#): > > > > Protestants, Catholics and Jews are pretty much cut from the same cloth. I’d have to believe that for one to vote to uphold Roe V Wade, they can’t seriously consider themselves believers. > > And you’d be wrong. I am not a hundred feet away from a pair of believers who firmly support abortion rights. I’m a Christian, and I support abortion rights. I think abortion is a ‘Bad Thing’, and I wish that no woman would ever choose to have one, but I don’t think that the government should take that choice away from her. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915/40 "2010-05-12T15:10:17Z")
> [@jebert](#): > > Appointed vs elected is key. There are quite possibly atheist members of Congress, but I’d expect darned few, especially within the last 20 years when religion and politics seem to have become more entwined. Can anyone point to a recent Senator or Congressman who has openly declared to be an atheist? [Pete Stark](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Stark) (D-CA) is generally referred to as the first and only atheist Congressman. Senator Ted Kaufman (D-DE) often refers to himself as a humanist, but is listed as a Roman Catholic. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-atheists-on-the-supreme-court/538915.md?page=3)