Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ubertuber
In my opinion, "free exercise thereof" does not encompass religious expression through governmental means. To me it looks like this is the direction modern interpretation is headed - and that's a change from the days of Christianity almost being endorsed without being established. It could be that the resurgence of the religious right in mainstream politics is a reaction to this direction in the courts.
|
Thanks for laying a framework, uber. Hopefully that will entice some more responses to a topic that I find fascinating.
As far as religion goes, I have to agree with the distinction that you're drawing between personal and state-sponsored religion. If you want to erect a giant cross on your property (assuming that it's structurally sound and fall within the local zoning ordanances), that's fine with me. However, putting one on the side of City Hall is something completely different. The government, whether its local, state or federal, has no business erecting religious icons. Now, if private citizens want to do it on government property, that's fine with me, so long as there's no discrimination amongst the religions. And if that means that the local satanists get to put up whatever it is they want to display, so be it.