[Racehorse]

Secular Humanism even has its own creeds

From the article:

The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being. In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described "secular humanism" as a religion

[Lexinom]

Yeah I read that. So it would seem that hope for change would be ill-placed, as that case has had little impact.

You know, probably, that the whole concept of separation has been perverted from its original intent, in which the state could not impose a state religion, like Anglicanism or Catholicism, nor forbid its free exercise. Nowhere did the founders give any indication that mere theism consitituted a religion.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. . . "

This has been bludgeoned into an unofficial state endorsement of secular humanism, a distinct worldview with man as the highest power. You and I are forced to fund the wide dissemination of its presuppositions whether we agree with them or not because, Toracaso v Watkins notwithstanding, it has managed to sneak under the "religion" radar. The current case is still cause for some optimism though.