tpaine, when I see that my good friend Landru has a lot of respect for you. Anybody that has Landru's respect is definitly a person of admirable character, and you deserve my respect also. I thank you both.. Its refreshing to rationally argue religious points without all the emotional baggage..
tpaine, you and I are locked in a debate over the differance between the establishment of a religion, and the *mere* expression of religion.
I've been making the point that Keyes position is far beyond 'expression'. I have no problems with free exercise of religion.
I understand your points about the coercion of a state established religion, ( Although I gave you some examples of our Founding Fathers expressing religion, perhaps I have relied too much on Alan Keyes.) However, if we honestly examine the situation in American society today, look at where the coercion lies:
When state employees, school children, etc. are given time off for the Christmas holiday, it is called the "Winter holiday", as the word "Christmas" is religious "expression". I fact, there have been many instances lately, where public employees are denied the opportunity for religious "expression." In Eugene, Oregon, firefighters were ordered to remove a Christmas tree from their fire station, because it was a religious "expression." Christmas programs have been canceled in public schools, because even voluntary attendance shows approval of religious "expression." My daughter's school can no longer have a bacclaureate ceremony, because of it's a religious "expression". The Pledge of Allegiance is called declared unconstitutional, because of it's religious "expression." Boy Scouts are denied the use of schools, and other public buildings to hold weekly meetings, because their acknowlegement of God is a religious "expression". A granite Ten Commandments monument (donated, and paid for ENTIRELY by VOLUNTARY contributions) is not allowed to be displayed in a public courthouse, because it constitutes religious "expression." And so it goes.
Anyone who has followed this subject, could cite hundreds of examples of denied religious "expression."
Yes, they can.. But in almost all those cases, courts have explained their constitutional basis for their opinions in that particular case. Such cases build 'case law', -- but your constitutional right to expression remains.
In most instances, all you have to do is take your expression to private property.
Given the state of our state today, how can you honestly tell me that the coercion is in the establishment of a religion? Or is it really in the prohibition of "the free excercise ("expression") thereof"? Regards.
Our basic concept on this is fairly simple, imo..
--- You are free to 'exercise' most anywhere.. But try to stay out of my face while you do it.. -- Ordinary courtesy used to guide most of us..
"--- You are free to 'exercise' most anywhere.. But try to stay out of my face while you do it.. -- Ordinary courtesy used to guide most of us." Tell that to the ACLU, who gets in everyones face about the tiniest of assumed expression. They get in the face of any city who calls DEC. 25th, "Christmas holiday" a violation of "church and state". They have filed lawsuits all over the country, demanding that cities call it the "Winter Holiday" Then they defend NAMBLA, on the grounds of a First Amendment issue, at the same time attacking the Boy Scouts.
OK.
Well maybe the ACLU should demand that all public employees no longer take time off for the Federally recognized "Christmas Day holiday"!!! How do you suppose that would go over for folks who seem to be so afraid that any acknowledgment of God is some sort of violation of the First Amendment establishment clause?
..."courts have explained their constitutional basis for their opinions in that particular case. Such cases build 'case law', --
-Yes, and some would argue that many Courts no longer look to the Constitution, they merely allude to it via 'case law,' and in the end, this allusion eventually turns into ellusion.
"In most instances, all you have to do is take your expression to private property."
Your views appear to be inconsistent, because you called the Ten Commandments on the Supreme Court "artwork", and in the Alabama court, it is religious expression?
OK.
A donated Ten Commandments monument is taken out because of the ""separation of church and state"".
Conversely, a newly restored 55 ft. tall "Vulcan" - a Roman god of forge is set on Birmingham, Alabama city property. (to the cost of $14.5 million
to taxpayers.)
