Rethinking Religious Liberty

Catholic World Report ^ | April 25, 2013 | Benjamin Wiker

[SnakeDoctor]

Tyranny of the minority — particularly the oversensitive minority — is no better than tyranny of the majority. Manger scenes, Christmas plays and mentions of faith in schools do not affect the freedom of thought, or of teaching your children what is best.

Through the banishment of any mention of the majority faith in schools, the current liberal ‘reading of the establishment clause’ has created a country that has handed control of public space to an atheist minority ... rather than keeping us safe from a potential atheist majority, as you say it would.

SnakeDoc

[annalex]

The constitution makes no mention of sports or music.

Neither of the school curriculum in general. Yes, a government employee (teachers really aren't that, but I get your overall point) can teach religion, and certainly the principal can invite a priest, a pastor or a rabbi to teach in the government school without putting them on government payroll. What a government employee cannot do is under an act of Congress establish a religion. That is all.

we don’t really need the government endorsing religions either

Sure we do. The early state constitutions not only endorsed, they established religion. Today we would be far better if traditional religions of the United States: Christianity and perhaps Judaism be given preference, and the other religions and pseudo religions were treated as artifacts of culture and entertainment, like the sports and the circuses.