[jwalsh07]

What I addressed was prohibiting the government from promoting the exercise of a specific religion.

The first amendment requires neutrality as regards religion.

However, we have a slight problem because for my entire adult life the government has been promoting secular humanism to the exclusion of religion. What now?

[lugsoul]

Well, I don't know what government you are talking about. I've lived most of my life in states that aren't shy about religion, and are exactly neutral about which one they like.

Since you have stated that the Establishment Clause requires neutrality in religion, do you agree that Judge Moore's actions - as defined by his own statements - reflect the neutrality required by the First Amendment?

[lugsoul]

whoops - meant to say "aren't exactly neutral"

[First Amendment]

However, we have a slight problem because for my entire adult life the government has been promoting secular humanism to the exclusion of religion. What now?

In a sense, there are only two religions. One is the worship of God, the Transcendent Supreme Being, who is worshipped variously by all monotheists.

The other "religion" is the worship of His creation out of lust and envy, with the desire to usurp His position as owner and creator. Secular humanism is one way to describe the second religion.