text: Your words drew from me an honest, reasonable reaction.  You expressed no basis at all to for the accusation that "he wants to impose the beliefs of the Catholic and Evangelical Churches."  If such an extreme accusation is unfounded, why is it not aptly called "hysterical"?  And since your assertion directly implies that a Catholic justice is not acceptable, why would one not accuse you of a 'non-inclusive" approach to judicial appointments?  Why is that "decent"?  I play to no audience, and so far as I know, I have none other than those who respond to what I write.