i reply to rebelkev
> SA, does this go so far as to ban people from praying, not mandated by schools, congress, etc., >mind you, among others they associate with on public property to include schools, government >buildings?
no, of course not. as long as the prayer is not an official function, and it is not mandatory, or a requirement. one distinction i have to make is that in schools you aren't dealing with people at equal levels. teachers certainly can't lead prayers for 2 reasons. 1)it is the parent's right to decide what religion they want their kids exposed to, if any at all. and second of all, kids are very impressionable, and so if a school were to lead children in prayer, they would be violating the parental right of freedom of religion(the parent acting in the interest of the child).
Isn't that the reason FOR the 1st amendment? To be free to practive your religion and speak out when you feel necessary WHERE EVER you happen to be?
yes, and as a private citizen i CAN pray whereever and whenever i want.
I still don't see how the monument was a legal recognition of a religion.
I STRONGLY agree in the fact that Congress can't and shouldn't recognize a religion, however, I don't see this as doing so. On the other hand, you have Alan Keyes stating that the states CAN recognize a state religion and that he interprets the Constitution as prohibiting the US from doing so. That is NOT what I believe in. If that were the case, I guess Utah would already have a state religion, Mormon.
I don't believe that the Commandments on public property mandates a "State" religion anymore than I think a statue of Mohammed would recognize Islam. If that's what they want, fine. I think it's petty to argue over it. You will here me complain when there is a move to actually make a law recognizing a religion. ....and I don't think this is a first step. You have to realize that, although we don't recognize a religion, our laws were based on the premise of having a creator.
Here is the problem. When you walk into the couthouse and see the ten commandments, the very natural reaction is to question under what law am i subject to? the written one, or god's? furthermore, if you happen to be muslim, buddhist, agnotic, hindi, or even atheist, you will feel that you don't belong in this building. you get the very strong impression that this is a building for christians and jews, and not for you. no citizen should ever be made to feel that way when walking into a govt. building. when a judge puts up the ten commandments, he is clearly establishing christianity and judaism as the religions of choice in his building. the fact that it is paid for by private money doesn't excuse the fact that the govt. through the official capacity of judge Moore as chief justice erected a statue of very deep religious sigificance. now if that isn't an official recognition of religion, then what is? judge moore didn't put this up in his home(private citizen right)...he used his authorityas chief justice to put this up in a PUBLIC building.
|