[cartoonistx]

Congress shall make no law RESPECTING an ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION.

This sentence would have been understood by The Founders to mean "Congress shall make no law that establishes a religion." Over the years, the courts have taken great liberties interpeting what constitutes such a law, however, it seems clear to me that the original intent was to forbid the formation of a state church ala the Church of England. The Framers detested the idea that their new government might favor one church over another as was the practice under The Crown.

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

I am going to jump in here at the end of a very long thread (I admit having not read every comment)

My overall understanding of the argument here is that we are upset at the Supreme`s interpretation of the law - in this case the first amendment. Since language is not mathematics and laws rely on langauge (which is fluid and changes meaning over time) laws must be interpreted and reinterpreted. This means things can change.

For the sake of consistency (and unlike the RATS integrity requires that we be consistent) I very much demand the removal of that statue in accordance with the law as intepreted by the highest court in the land.

Thereafter, we should use the debate and the current polictical majority to change the individuals who are intepreting the law.

If we do not uphold the law, as interpreted by our highest court, we have lost the basis upon which our Republic was founded. Just because I may disagree with the way a law was interpreted, does not mean I will, like Slick Willy, let this local judge once again dessicrate the law of the land.

Remove the commandments, but keep them in safe storage. Work on changing the intepretations and then bring them back. That is the way the system works. It may be slow and frustrating, but it does work.

[xzins]

Judge Moore sees it a saying: Congress shall make NO law respecting AN ESTABLISHMENT of religion.

There are different types of establishments. We can have an eating establishment, a printing establishment, etc. This uses the following definition of the word "establishment." (See red)

Main Entry: es·tab·lish·ment Pronunciation: is-'ta-blish-m&nt Function: noun Date: 15th century 1 : something established : as a : a settled arrangement; especially : a code of laws b : ESTABLISHED CHURCH c : a permanent civil or military organization d : a place of business or residence with its furnishings and staff e : a public or private institution

In other words, the interpretation is this:

(paraphrase) "When it comes to any religious institution, enterprise, endeavor; the Congress can make NO law whatsoever."

As you can see, there is nothing grammatical or lexical that prevents that interpretation.

The only issue is what was the intent of the framers. Which definition (or both) did they intend?

Did they institute a HANDS OFF policy regarding any religious subject?