Today, Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. There is some dispute on the reasons she did so, but I find myself somewhat relieved. Bush’s nomination of Miers completely backfired. Moreover, although I am a Christian, and I support placing a Christian on the Supreme Court; this cannot be the only reason for a nomination.
Evidently, there is insufficient data to validate whether or not Miers has adequate qualifications and experience to provide sufficient Jurisprudence. As Christians, we have to consider the fact that Roe vs. Wade is not he only thing that Miers would be ruling on. Further, matters concerning the United States Constitution--plead for judicial wisdom and experience.
Simply put, Miers was not a good nomination, we don’t know her qualifications and just being a Christian is insufficient. I couldn’t find anything better than Frances Beckwith’s comment on Miers; and I will end on his note:
But for other Evangelicals, Miers' personal piety and promise of constitutional fidelity are neither sufficient nor necessary conditions for being a good justice or having a well thought-out judicial philosophy. I suspect that Evangelicals of the former variety would not board an airliner whose company motto is "God is our co-pilot, that's why we hire pilots with little or no experience." But it seems to me that the trajectory of our nation's juriprudential infrastructure is at least as important as one's airline safety.
"When it comes to your eternal life, you are saved by grace through faith. But when it comes to your jurisprudence, you are saved by works."