[ASOC]

AT some risk to my flame proof drawers.....

Separating religion from politics IS a big deal - ever wonder why the “prods” and “catholics” (lower case intentional) get by in the good old US of A, when back in the old country- they are willing to kill each other? Because one controls the levers of government - very visible, very much in your face.

That kind of silliness is not really tolerated here, one (specific) sect does not rule...Not convinced? - witness India, Pakistan, Shia vs Sunni, and on and on. Bad news all-around.

Do I agree with the ACLU? Nope, Just making a point that some folks may see the "rock" as more of a threat than you kind souls born and raised in the USA and as a member of the dominate sect....... Please think before you flame, and if you must flame, please do so in a private reply. No reason to tie up the board....

[Maelstrom]

The former USSR, China, N. Korea...these are the examples you're looking for, for that is where religion and politics are separated, by law.

In the US, the battle is not about the separation of church and state, it's about the prohibition of religion on any public lands.

[f.Christian]

aclu shariaist ... ussc mullahs --- ayatollas ?

[boris]

"Separating religion from politics IS a big deal - ever wonder why the “prods” and “catholics” (lower case intentional) get by in the good old US of A, when back in the old country- they are willing to kill each other? Because one controls the levers of government - very visible, very much in your face."

The problem is that the First Amendment does not mention "separating religion from politics", nor does the Constitution in general. It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

In short, it is a restriction on the Federal Congress from making laws regarding religion; it does not say that a courthouse in Alabama cannot display the Commandments.

This is simple English. I repeat: NOWHERE in the Constitution is anything that requires "separation of religion from politics."

--Boris

[Cold Heat]

Separating religion from politics IS a big deal - ever wonder why the “prods” and “catholics” (lower case intentional) get by in the good old US of A, when bac..........

I understand your point, and share the thought that religions often misbehave and kill each other in the name of God. but you are overlooking something.

the constitution never envisions a separation of church and state. This was a invention of the courts in the early sixties. we have seen the degradation of our foundations ever since.

The point is that government was prohibited from endorsing or prohibiting any religion. As such, it was never intended that it could prohibit the display of a reference to God. Their is no religious context to the commandments, only a reference to laws passed down by the almighty that nearly all religions endorse. The suit was brought by atheists who do represent a religion by definition. The ten commandments do not.

IMHO

[sweetliberty]

"Just making a point that some folks may see the "rock" as more of a threat than you kind souls born and raised in the USA"

At the risk of sounding "intolerant", if they don't like the way we do things here they are free to leave. The establishment clause was put in there for no other reason than to keep the government from establishing one denomination as preferred over another as had been done Europe. (In earler days denominations were referred to as religions). I'm sure that in their wildest dreams they could not have thought it would ever be taken to mean embracing foreign gods, and while we might tolerate those who adhere to those "religions", we are not bound to build our laws around them.

[Timothy Paul]

"(Think before you hit SEND)"

Right, next time.