[ConsistentLibertarian]

It's a curious issue. I don't understand why people feel their faith is threatened if the State doesn't endorse it. As someone who wants to see the State have less rather than more power, I can't understand why anyone on FR would have a principled reason for wanting the state throw it's weight in one direction or the other.

There are Christians all over Europe who manage to be devout in their faith without feeling undermined by the limited role their governments take in this arena.

[ambrose]

There are Christians all over Europe who manage to be devout in their faith without feeling undermined by the limited role their governments take in this arena.

Are you making an attempt at irony? Most countries in Europe have state established/run/recognized religions.

[First Amendment]

As someone who wants to see the State have less rather than more power, I can't understand why anyone on FR would have a principled reason for wanting the state throw it's weight in one direction or the other.

Now, who would you say is doing the major heavy lifting of "throwing weight around" - Moore, or the ACLU and Barry Lynn and company?

And did you read the ACLU's email stating that they are GOING OUT OF THEIR WAY - hunting and searching - trying to find a lost 10 Commandments memorial so they can start (yet another) lawsuit?

[First Amendment]

(Forgot this part:)

There are Christians all over Europe who manage to be devout in their faith without feeling undermined by the limited role their governments take in this arena.

So you see the government on a search and destroy mission, eradicating any vestige of religious expression anywhere except in the privacy of one's own closet as a LIMITED ROLE???

Sorry for the caps but I have a hard time seeing the limited role of government in their ruthless nitpicking removal of any and all religious freedom in any public sphere. And I would not be called a Christian fundamentalist by any of the same.

[sockmonkey]

There are Christians all over Europe who manage to be devout in their faith without feeling undermined by the limited role their governments take in this arena.

Newsflash, I was in Europe a few months ago, and saw a painting depicting the Battle of Lepanto in a very public government owned building. The "other religion" hordes in the painting were portrayed having horns, tails, dog and monkey faces, etc.

[rebel]

You wrote, "I don't understand why people feel their faith is threatened if the State doesn't endorse it. As someone who wants to see the State have less rather than more power, I can't understand why anyone on FR would have a principled reason for wanting the state throw it's weight in one direction or the other."

What is supposed to be the constitutional check on government power? The states. The 10th amendment. Then the people.

You resist states rights, you are endorsing an all powerful central government. If the Mormans in Utah want a monument of some sort that is their right. Pretend some small town of Buddists in Kalifornia want somme sort of monument that is their right.

Want to prevent all powerful government? Support states rights.

[Iconoclast2]

The single greatest error of libertarians is to fail to recognize that limiting the power of the Federal government is far more important than using that power to restrict the power of state governments to regulate individuals. By defending Federal arrogations of power that, in the short run, appear to advance individual liberties (the freedom not to have to view items of a quasi-religious nature in government offices???), they alienate natural allies and bring about less freedom in the long run.

[Conservative til I die]

There are Christians all over Europe who manage to be devout in their faith

Christianity is dead in Europe. Get with the program. Countries with 8% Mass attendance are not devout.

[sfRummygirl]

Sure, if you like churches that are sterilized, Europe is great. If you don't want to really grow at all, or actually try to get close to God, they are fine.