[WOSG]

As for the 10 Commandment display, it should be permissible under any Judicial regimen that properly allows a place for official recognition in voluntary, open ways of religious sentiment or religious heritage on our culture. "Voluntary, open" - see, we weren't that far apart after all ;)

Glad to see the comity. Okay, but I say Judge Moore's display - and the many dozens of similar Ten Commandment displays around the country, on legal seals and on buildings/courthouses, *and* the village naivity scenes - are LEGAL. They dont violate establishment clause.

Are you agreeing to *that*?

[WOSG]

That should be Village *Nativity* scenes.

I am not sure what a village "naivity" scene would include. Maybe Clinton's promise to Arkansas not to run for President. :-)

[general_re]

Okay, but I say Judge Moore's display - and the many dozens of similar Ten Commandment displays around the country, on legal seals and on buildings/courthouses, *and* the village naivity scenes - are LEGAL. They dont violate establishment clause.

The function of the state is to protect the rights and freedoms of all citizens - more expression is better, far better, than less. If those rights and freedoms are protected for all citizens, regardless of faith, sect, creed, or ethos, I have no problem with the Ten Commandments or nativity scenes or what-have-you. I don't insist that citizens have the right to shut down a religious expression that they don't care for, but I do insist that they be assured of an equal place and time to express themselves in a similar manner. In the public square, that is - your house should be run by your rules, as you see fit.