Some theocratic extremists don't want this to happen. They'd rather engage in street theater. During the hearings yesterday, a woman in the spectators' gallery jumped up and started yelling about overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that established a constitutional right to abortion.

The screamer turned out to be Norma McCorvey, the plaintiff in the Roe case. Some years ago, McCorvey switched sides and joined the anti-abortion movement. She fell in with bad company, hanging out with Randall Terry and other extremists.

Terry is determined to turn the hearings into a circus. As The Washington Post reported, McCorvey and three others who were arrested yesterday "appeared to be players in the shock street-theater troupe of Randall Terry, who founded Operation Rescue 20 years ago and yesterday brought his provocative props to his latest venue. Outside the Hart Building, Terry and his band brandished posters of aborted fetuses and children's coffins holding dolls covered in stage blood. A demonstrator dressed in a judge's robes carried the sickle of the Grim Reaper."

Of course Terry has the right to protest in any way he likes. He doesn't have the right to disrupt the hearings, and, more importantly, he has absolutely no right be taken seriously by the American people. Terry is a fringe character and a shameless self-promoter. He adds nothing of value to the debate.

But it would be a mistake to look at the clownish antics of Terry and assume they're an accurate representation of the Religious Right's response to the Sotomayor nomination. Terry specializes in saying and doing outrageous things to get his name in the papers and his image on cable news. Then he melts away until it's time for the next performance.

More prominent Religious Right groups - the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, the American Center for Law and Justice and others - have eschewed Terry's street theater but have still taken extraordinary measures to block Sotomayor's nomination.  

I've been monitoring e-mails and fund-raising letters from these groups since Sotomayor was nominated. They have unleashed a steady stream of denunciations against her. They've taken her statements out of context, distorted her rulings, questioned her intelligence and implied that she's merely an affirmative action hire.

The real problem these groups have with Sotomayor is that she was nominated by a Democratic president. The Religious Right assumes, without much evidence, that she will automatically align herself with the high court's liberal bloc. So they come out with guns blazing and try to stir up their supporters. The over-the-top rhetoric and sleazy personal attacks may not stop Sotomayor, but they're a good way to raise money and energize the shock troops.

This should be a reminder to the media that the Religious Right isn't dead yet, and that the "culture wars" retain much resonance. Instead of putting so much emphasis on Terry and his sorry band of theocrats, perhaps the media should take a look at what's going on in the offices of Religious Right powerhouses.

President Barack Obama might have the opportunity to name other nominees to the high court, especially if he ends up serving two terms. If a conservative or moderate justice steps down, Obama could affect the ideological balance of the court.

If that were to happen - if the ideological balance of the court were at stake - the Religious Right would go absolutely ballistic. There's no telling how low their top leaders would go. No attack would be considered too outrageous. My guess is their behavior would make the fight over Sotomayor look like an afternoon of high tea.

In a sense, the sparring over Sotomayor may be just a taste of things to come. As the Sotomayor hearings unfold, we - and especially the media - should be paying less attention to kooks like Terry and more to people like Tony Perkins, Don Wildmon, James Dobson, Jay Sekulow and Jerry Falwell Jr.

We just might learn some things that will come in handy a few years down the line.