In belittling Tea Party activists? veneration of the U.S. Constitution, Newsweek?s Andrew Romano engages in a little pop psychology. He suggests that the nation?s governing document serves as a surrogate for the Bible:

O?Donnell?s rhetoric should sound familiar. In part that?s because her fellow Tea Party patriots?Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, the guy at the rally in the tricorn hat?also refer to the Constitution as if it were a holy instruction manual that was lost, but now, thanks to them, is found. ?

From a legal perspective, there?s a case to be made that O?Donnell?s argument is inaccurate. The Constitution is a relentlessly secular document that never once mentions God or Jesus. And nothing in recent jurisprudence suggests that the past few decades of governing have been any less constitutional than the decades that preceded them. But the Tea Party?s language isn?t legal, and neither is its logic. It?s moral: right vs. wrong. What O?Donnell & Co. are really talking about is culture war.

If Mr. Romano ever decides to look for a real reason for the Constitution?s allure, perhaps he can start with a viewing of the John Locke Foundation and North Carolina History Project?s recent Citizens? Constitutional Workshop.