SCOTUS judge thinks State Religions fine.

[Brian37]

THIS is why elections mater and why everyone reading this needs to speak out every day everywhere as much as possible in any way you can.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2014/05/constitutional-horror-clarence-thomas-argues-states-can-establish-official-religion/

[AllPurposeAtheist]

That's all good and well Clarence, but our constitution explicitly prohibits it.. Constitution.. Look it up doubting Thomas.. 

[trdsf]

I said it during his confirmation hearings, and I'll say it again: this man is not suited to be on the Supreme Court.

It's more than just this.  From a 2011 article in the L.A. Times:

Prisoners, he wrote, have no constitutional right to be protected from beatings by guards. Teenagers and students have no free-speech rights at all, he said in an opinion Monday, because in the 18th century, when the Constitution was written, parents had "absolute authority" over their children.

Two years ago, the court ruled that a school official could not strip-search a 13-year-old girl to look for two extra-strength ibuprofen pills. Thomas -- alone -- dissented, calling the search of her underwear "reasonable and justified."

Basically, he believes that the Constitution should be considered in terms of when it was written in the 18th century and that the intervening 225+ years are irrelevant.  I wonder if it's ever crossed his mind that in 1789, he himself would have counted as only 3/5 of a person and would have probably been owned by someone else...

Basically, his definition of Constitutional interpretation is the legal equivalent of Biblical literalism, and it's just as stupid and blind.