…at the very moment Ms. Feinstein is alienating religious conservatives, two prominent Democrats are pushing a new progressive claim on Christianity. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) has spoken to journalists about how her faith shapes her political views. And Hillary Clinton, who reportedly once considered becoming an ordained minister, has made religion central to her postelection messaging, as the Atlantic reported last month in a story titled \u201c Hillary Wants to Preach.\u201d<\/p>\n
Sens. Feinstein and Durbin were troubled not by Ms. Barrett\u2019s Catholicism, but by her failure to prove her religion could conform to a more dogmatic progressivism. The \u201creligious test\u201d Democrats want to impose isn\u2019t about religion per se; it\u2019s about ensuring that every religious claim can be bent to more comprehensive political aims. It\u2019s about defining anyone who dissents from the mores of the sexual revolution as disqualified from public office<\/strong>. That\u2019s what makes Ms. Feinstein\u2019s questioning so chilling.<\/p>\n Few liberals have spoken out against these religious tests, providing tacit consent for the Democratic Party to continue the practice. One of America\u2019s major political parties appears prepared to consent to a very different kind of creed from the one the American founders envisioned. Our forefathers understood religious freedom in positive terms, as freedom for the highest good, God. This \u201cfirst freedom\u201d was held as the basis of all the political freedoms, including the freedom to dissent and to disagree on matters of law and politics.<\/p>\n Ms. Barrett has spent her career honoring the older creed\u2014not only with her Scalia-like deference to the law, but through respect for freedom of religion and conscience. Ms. Feinstein honored the new creed, the one dividing an already polarized nation. A dogmatism now threatens countless Americans\u2019 freedom, and it isn\u2019t Catholicism.<\/p>\n