Kennedy says the First Amendment "could not be more clear" in its declaration that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
"These Ten Commandments displays are not laws -- they clearly have no legal force," he argued. "They are not a religion. There is no 'Ten Commandments' religion. In fact, the Ten Commandments are revered and followed by at least two religions -- Judaism and Christianity. And, finally, a mere display of the Ten Commandments does not 'establish' a religion."
The displays, however, acknowledge God, he said, which is a foundation of the United States.
"Our nation came into being because we acknowledged God," he said. "Independence, the founders said, was something to which they were entitled by 'the laws of nature and of nature's God.' Without the public acknowledgement of God, who is mentioned four times in the Declaration of Independence, America would not exist."
Kennedy argued further that the "inalienable rights" with which American citizens are endowed, are guaranteed in the Ten Commandments.
"The right of private property, gravely injured last week by the high court, is guaranteed in the eighth commandment which states, 'Thou shalt not steal,'" Kennedy explained.
WHAT? DOES HE NOT REMEMBER THAT HE CAST THE SWING VOTE ON THAT "GRAVE INJURY"??? WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? DID HE REALLY SAY THIS?
Wrong Kennedy! Quote in WND article was from "Evangelical Christian activist D. James Kennedy". Guess I am too worked up about this whole issue to read thouroughly. Stupid mistake. My apologies.