'...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...'
So many forget about that part.
I still don't understand how some folks can read "seperation of church and state" in the words of the First Ammendment. It just looks, to me, that these guys were trying to say Congress shouldn't get involved with the people's religious beliefs and practices...PERIOD! Doesn't that mean that if the majority of people in a community want to sing the Lord's Prayer at a graduation, then it's OK??!! Doesn't the fact that the U.S. is a free country allow these people who do not agree with the majority of the community to move to another where their own beliefs are more widely practiced?
I'm no expert on The Constitution nor am I well read on American history, but I'm pretty sure I'm with you on this, Larry, but even though this thread has some great arguments, it looks like the lot of us are just really on the same side of different fences...(did I say that right?)
See my Post #170.
If a Catholic majority public school in Los Angeles has a graduation and the community, of it's own free will, organizes a recital of the Hail Mary, that is OK.
If the Catholic majority public school requires a Protestant, Jewish, Mormon, or Islamic student to recite the Hail Mary, that is not OK.
The People can choose to pray however they please.
The Government may not mandate any prayer at all and, in my opinion, cannot prohibit the People from paying however they please.
Yes. Doesn't have to be a majority even. The right is absolute, not contingent upon a vote (that is the way it usually works in practice however).
One of the arguements which is most offensive is "What about Wicca, what about Thuggery, what about Islamic fundamentalism? They are next! They are next! Do you want that? Do you want that?"
That line of reasoning assumes people are not rational, people are not tolerant and people cannot work things out by themselves.
Unelected judges must tell them what to do. We must censor religion because some people might abuse their freedom.