Well, if I read this correctly the biblical discusion took place on state provided property. Therefore, since the woman was living at the expense of the state she must accept “The Golden Rule,” i.e. “those who have the gold rule!” The state provides therefore the state will control those for whom it provides.
==========================================
The citizens provide the state provides nothing.
We are guaranteed Freedom OF Religion not Freedom FROM religion.
Nowhere in the Constitution does free speech get limited because of who paid for the venue. A stronger case could be made for a private venue where the owner does not want religion discussed.
This just shows how poorly those USSC morons in black robes are that they cannot decipher the difference in Freedom OF and Freedom FROM.
If we as a country want Freedom FROM religion then we can achieve that ONLY by a constitutional amendment. If that is what these communist vermin want then let them spend their own money drumming up votes for such an amendment.
Well, if I read this correctly the biblical discusion took place on state provided property. Therefore, since the woman was living at the expense of the state she must accept “The Golden Rule,” i.e. “those who have the gold rule!” The state provides therefore the state will control those for whom it provides.
Thanks for sharing the liberatarian “logic” here. It has nothing to do with the constitution’s free speech protections, but then libertarism has nothing to do with constitutional freedom.
>, since the woman was living at the expense of the state she must accept “The Golden Rule,” ..The state provides therefore the state will control those for whom it provides.<
Which would certainly an powerful argument against socialism, but the idea that First Amendment is the basis for this is absurd. Jefferson himself regularly attended ecumenical religious services in the house of Representatives, and the antiseptic separation is not supported. that this rule is valid is absurd.
And you cannot prohibit talk about faith on public property, esp. in a consensual format, much less prayer, any more than you can prohibit talking about specific ideologies reading literature from such, or meditation. And to single out formal religion is bigotry.