[Tired of Taxes]

If, in 1876, the 14th Amendment had not made the Establishment Clause applicable to the states (according the the very congressman who passed the 14th Amendment), how did the Supreme Court magically "interpret" it to do so 75 years later?

If Congress and the state has in some way become entangled, then the First Amendment should apply.

For example, public schools do receive federal funding. Congress/the fed gov't has inserted itself into public schools.

The question is: In what way is Congress/the federal gov't involved in state courthouses? That's not a rhetorical question, just a question.

[savedbygrace]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Because the 1st Amendment forbids Congress from passing any "law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," then the laws which entangled the federal government in local schools in any way that prohibited the free exercise of religion by anyone was and is in violation of the Constitution.

It is those laws which must be declared null and void, not the free exercise of religion.

This is a logic expression that the Court has gotten wrong for the past 40+ years. They are supposed to be educated men and women, but they failed Logic 101, and continue to exhibit their pathetic failing.