Thanks, Ed, for the postings (beginning here) about the intentionally offensive and unintentionally hilarious Geoffrey Stone. It would follow from Stone’s argument, if he were right about what drives the five justices in the Carhart majority, that adherence to the Catholic faith (at least in what Stone would likely call its “conservative” form) would be a guarantee that one understands the Constitution properly. But I don’t think that is what he meant to argue.