Religious right worried that John Roberts isn't a member of the Taliban

Gee, so Mr. Roberts may not believe that the Bible is the supreme law of the land. What a surprise (actually, it is a bit of a surprise, coming from a Bush court appointee).

Of course, the religious right is rumbling about Roberts' not-very-Biblical answer:

While many pro-family supporters are singing the praises of Judge Roberts' performance during the hearings last week, not everyone is joining in the song. For example, when the topic of the nominee's personal faith -- and its potential influence on his judicial decisions -- was brought to the table by California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, Roberts said: "There is nothing in my personal views, based on faith or other sources, that would prevent me from applying the precedents of the court faithfully." He added that when it comes to judging, he looks to law books for guidance -- not to the Bible or other religious sources. (See related story)

Rob Schenck of the National Clergy Council says that while he believes Roberts has convinced most observers that he is a conservative and has a conservative judicial philosophy, he admits he was not comfortable with that response. "I am very bothered by the statement that Judge Roberts made when he said that the Bible and his faith do not factor into his judgments on the court," Schenck says.

The National Clergy Council spokesman acknowledges that Roberts may have been saying what he needed to in order to be confirmed -- but the nominee was under oath, and Schenck finds that worrisome.

That's right, and you should be worried. Because either Roberts isn't some nutjob who thinks America should become a fundamentalist religious state where the Bible is the law of the land (I can't wait for the stonings, and don't even get me started on those impure women and their periods), or John Roberts DOES believe all that crap and he perjured himself.

So, which is going to be, religious right? Is John Roberts actually NOT one of your boys, or did he commit a crime under oath (not to mention, I'd love to know if it was under oath on a Bible).