Replies

I think people need to remember that the first ammendment, which these activists try to stretch like hell to prohibit any thought of religion in schools apply only to the FEDERAL government.

Where do you get this idea?

Establishment Clause: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ..."

The Establishment Clause has generally come to mean that government cannot authorize a church, cannot pass laws that aid or favor one religion over another, cannot pass laws that favor religious belief over non belief, cannot force a person to profess a belief. In short, government must be neutral toward religion and cannot be entangled with any religion.

Religion in public schools

Minersville v. Gobitis, 310 U.S. 586 (1940) - Supreme Court rules that a public school may require students to salute the flag and pledge allegiance even if it violates their religious scruples.

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) - Court overturns Gobitis but is broader in its scope. No one can be forced to salute the flag or say the pledge of allegiance if it violates the individual conscience.

McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948) - Court finds religious instruction in public schools a violation of the establishment clause and therefore unconstitutional.

Zorach v. Clausen, 343 U.S. 306 (1952) - Court finds that release time from public school classes for religious instruction does not violate the establishment clause.

Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962) - Court finds school prayer unconstitutional.

Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963) - Court finds Bible reading over school intercom unconstitutional and Murray v. Curlett, 374 U.S. 203 (1963) - Court finds forcing a child to participate in Bible reading and prayer unconstitutional.

Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968) - Court says the state cannot ban the teaching of evolution.

Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980) - Court finds posting of the Ten Commandments in schools unconstitutional.

Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985) - Court finds state law enforcing a moment of silence in schools had a religious purpose and is therefore unconstitutional.

Edwards v. Aquillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987) - Court finds state law requiring equal treatment for creationism has a religious purpose and is therefore unconstitutional.

Board of Education v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226 (1990) - The court rules that the Equal Access Act does not violate the First Amendment. Public schools that receive federal funds and maintain a "limited open forum" on school grounds after school hours cannot deny "equal access" to student groups based upon "religious, political, philosophical, or other content."

Lee v. Weisman, 112 SCt. 2649 (1992) - Court finds prayer at public school graduation ceremonies violates the establishment clause and is therefore unconstitutional.

Lamb's Chapel et al. v. Center Moriches Union Free School District, 508 U.S. 384 (1993) - Court says that school districts cannot deny churches access to school premises after-hours, if the district allowed the use of its building to other groups.

Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, (1994) - Court states that the New York State Legislature cannot create a separate school district for a religious community.

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, (2000) - Court rules that student-led prayers at public school football games violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Good News Club v. Milford Central School, (2001) - Court rules that Milford Central School cannot keep Good News Club from using its facilities because the school had created a limited public forum and prohibiting the religious club was viewpoint discrimination.

Ok db, you have assembled a glorious list of legalisms, and of course we all know that we need to have multiple layers of men in black robes to to keep reinterpreting several sentences of plainly written text because we are just not smart enough. But one fact remains regardless of what the men in black decide or redecide on any given topic, and that the Constitution was written to restrict what the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do to the people, not what the people can do.

The fact that corrupt people have been misusing the constitution for generations to force their agenda down everyones throat does not make it OK.

If you want to make laws that people must wear bananas on their heads or force them to pay for destructive lifestyles I recognize the current reality that you probably will be able to get away with it. Just spare me the sanctimony about it being based on an umpteenth reinterpretation of a few words in the constitution, because it is not. It is simply a manifestation of the political power of corrupt people with agendas filling the legal system with their kind.