[Hard_Pill_To_Swallow]

The Constitution says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" and the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot endorse religious belief precisely because such an endorsement alienates nonbelievers. Nevertheless, in 1954 Congress passed a law endorsing monotheism, which alienates atheists, to say nothing of religions which have more than one god. I still have not seen a single statement of fact which refutes this.

Every opposing argument has consisted of legal technicalities and personal attacks on Mr. Newdow, which have no bearing on the merits of this argument. Is there anyone out there who can find fault with the argument and not the man?

[homeschool mama]

**Hard_Pill_To_Swallow signed up 2002-09-09. **

Not surprised.

[Tired of Taxes]

Every opposing argument has consisted of legal technicalities and personal attacks on Mr. Newdow, which have no bearing on the merits of this argument.

Well said. To be honest, I'm not crazy about Newdow, either. It's his position on the Pledge that I support. But, I also support the position of Christian and other religious parents who don't want their children taught a non-Christian or anti-Christian or anti-religion agenda in public schools. I just wish they would extend the same respect to my family, but I won't hold my breath waiting for it. ;-)

BTW, welcome to Free Republic. If you support separation of church and state, don't expect to make any friends around here.