Another story that says nothingThis AP story on nominee Miers tells me absolutely nothing useful. Go read it and then come back.
First, I am not sure that her choice of church is all that relevant. It could be interesting background given that she had to make a choice to stay with the existing group or follow the split-off group. Why did the group split off? Everything potentially useful is in the first paragraph as far as I can tell.
WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers is among a group of congregants of a Dallas evangelical church who recently broke away due to differences over church rules and worship styles.
Which church rules and on which side is the group the nominee chose? There is also a statement from a friend who claims that she believes life begins at conception. That may be very interesting to some but I see know reason to believe with her, as with Chief Justice Roberts, that personal beliefs will necessarily translate into judicial actions. I hope it does not for either, or any other judge. Isn't that the point of being a strict constructionist?