--- In [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: <snip>Regarding religious and political free > speech, the Democrats would have a tuff time passing legislation on these > issues so they get their judges to legislate from the bench. Let's look at the > most obvious and first instance in my life time that I'm aware of. Everybody > knows education is a states responsibility and school prayer was common up > until the early sixties but the USSC ruled it could not be done. Some excuse of > a separation of church and state which is no where in the constitution but > found in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Ct. Baptists assuring them > the Federal government would not establish an official Church of State. > However, the first amendment does guarantee that the government shall not > establish a state religion NOR prohibit the FREE exercise there of. So if some > federal judge is telling people where and when they can or can not pray that is > prohibiting the free exercise there of claus, especially if it is the will of > the people in that school district to begin the day that way.
So you blame the democrats for abolishing formalized school prayer? Why thank you. :) The 1963 joint decisions on school prayer had ONE dissent. Interestingly, the cases, as are so often true, were more about the power of the federal constitution versus the power of the states. There was a long history going back probably 100 years that the federal government was to remain neutral on religious questions and do nothing to promote a religion. Some of the current justices, like Thomas, would say that if a state wanted school prayer that would be fine, it is not the federal government's business. My bet Thomas would go so far as saying that if a state wanted to establish a state religion, it could do so. Me, I believe in the right of the individual to be free from state or federal coerced religious practice. A good, solid liberal position.
