[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

"I pointed out the common misconception many Americans have in believing that the First Amendment applies to the states"

No! This is a false argument. An idiot's argument. If the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution did not apply, then STATE governments could impose religion on us at a local level, which is not true.

The honest argument is that there is no Constitutional prohibition on an individual employed by the government from expressing his personal religious belief.

[GOPMark]

Actually there is a strong original intent argument that states could applyu state religions, considering many states had some kind of state official religion AFTER ratification. Not that It hink its a GOOD idea to have state religion, cause it's not, but strict constructionism may very well support the OPTION of such

[supercat]

If the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution did not apply, then STATE governments could impose religion on us at a local level, which is not true.

Actually, weren't there some official local and state religions at the time the Constitution was ratified? They faded out by the time of the Civil War, but at the time of the original ratification I believe official state/local religions were recognized in some places.

[SedVictaCatoni]

The honest argument is that there is no Constitutional prohibition on an individual employed by the government from expressing his personal religious belief.

You're absolutely right. Unfortunately, that has nothing to do with the circumstances of Judge Moore and his stone.

[thtr]

The first Amendment of the Constitution is the exact opposite of the First Commandment in the Bible. One says that you can worship only the LORD God; the other says that you can worship ANY God.

[jwalsh07]

No! This is a false argument. An idiot's argument. If the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution did not apply, then STATE governments could impose religion on us at a local level, which is not true.

Not at all. The states managed to write amendments into their Constitutions prohibiting the establishment of state relgions long before the SCOTUS "idiots" built a Wall of Separation out of whole cloth.

If you'd like I can show you documents that attest to the fact that 16 times since the ratification of the 14th Amendment, Congress attempted to begin the process of amending the Consitution to apply the First Amendment to the states as well as Congress. It failed every time. Wanna know why?

Enough people feared an overly strong central government.

By the way I don't think the First Amendment "establishment clause" applies to the states at all. That is a constraint on the feds unlike speech and the written word which are individual and inalienable rights granted by the Creator.

[lawdog]

Regarding religion, the First Amendment was intended to accomplish three purposes. First, it was intended to prevent the establishment of a national church or religion, or the giving of any religious sect or denomination a preferred status. Second, it was designed to safeguard the right of freedom of conscience in religious beliefs against invasion solely by the national Government. Third, it was so constructed in order to allow the States, unimpeded, to deal with religious establishments and aid to religious institutions as they saw fit.

[GOPcapitalist]

No! This is a false argument. An idiot's argument. If the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution did not apply, then STATE governments could impose religion on us at a local level, which is not true.

Actually, it was indeed true during the early years of the republic. No less a source than John Marshall explicitly ruled that the bill of rights restrictions applied only to the general government, not the states. See Marshall's ruling in Barron v. Mayor and City of Baltimore for the details.

http://www.constitution.org/ussc/032-243a.htm