[Torie]

The constitution spoke about the establishment of religion, and textualists interpret that as proscribing the establishment of a formal state religion. The term "separation" came about in a SCOTUS opinion handed down during my lifetime I think, quoting Jefferson or something (I think Hugo Black did it, but that is a guess). Neither separation or the textualist establishment view is current SCOTUS law. Current SCOTUS law emphasizes the word "neutrality." Government must not take sides either in fostering or thwarting religion.

That I think is about right, although as we all know, the devil is in the details. If government does not foster moral values fostered by religion, and is not careful in not suffocating the hen that lays the golden eggs as it were, we are carrying a chain and ball when it comes to attempting to move to fashion prudent public policy for the public good, and for the moral health of the fruited plain, and all who reside upon it, including inter alia, this secular humanist near atheist.

And there you have it.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"...quoting Jefferson..."

Who was quoting Roger Williams, who was expanding on the ideas of Fausto Sozinni, A.K.A. Faustus Socinus.

[P-Marlowe]

That was a good post. Thanks.

[jwalsh07]

Re: your 2440. Establishment clause jurisprudence is a mess. It needs tobe cleaned up. SCOTUS is all over the place.

A prediction. Once Alito is confirmed, establishemnt clause jurisprudence will be cleaned up a bit with Scalia and Thomas pulling right, Alito and Roberts inthe middle and Kennedy forcing them more toward the center. The other 4 will be window dressing. Kennedy will be the guy with power.