quote:

Unsourced quotes from the comments section of that page hardly persuades me, BTW.

quote:

ORIGINAL:    EVERSON v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF EWING TP., 330 U.S. 1 (1947)

A portion of the body says:

"The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertain- [330 U.S. 1, 16]   ing or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.' Reynolds v. United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164.
We must consider the New Jersey statute in accordance with the foregoing limitations imposed by the First Amendment. But we must not strike that state statute down if it is within the state's constitutional power even though it approaches the verge of that power. See Interstate Consolidated Street Ry. Co. v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Holmes, J., supra 207 U.S. at 85, 88, 28 S.Ct. 26, 27, 28, 12 Ann.Cas. 555. New Jersey cannot consistently with the 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment contribute tax-raised funds to the support of an institution which teaches the tenets and faith of any church. On the other hand, other language of the amendment commands that New Jersey cannot hamper its citizens in the free exercise of their own religion. Consequently, it cannot exclude individual Catholics, Lutherans, Mohammedans, Baptists, Jews, Methodists, Non-believers, Presbyterians, or the members of any other faith, because of their faith, or lack of it, from receiving the benefits of public welfare legislation. While we do not mean to intimate that a state could not provide transportation only to children attending public schools, we must be careful, in protecting the citizens of New Jersey against state-established churches, to be sure that we do not inadvertently prohibit New Jersey from extending its general State law benefits to all its citizens without regard to their religious belief [330 U.S. 1, 17]   Measured by these standards, we cannot say that the First Amendment prohibits New Jersey from spending taxraised funds to pay the bus fares of parochial school pupils as a part of a general program under which it pays the fares of pupils attending public and other schools. It is undoubtedly true that children are helped to get to church schools. There is even a possibility that some of the children might not be sent to the church schools if the parents were compelled to pay their children's bus fares out of their own pockets when transportation to a public school would have been paid for by the State. The same possibility exists where the state requires a local transit company to provide reduced fares to school children including those attending parochial schools,24 or where a municipally owned transportation system undertakes to carry all school children free of charge. Moreover, state-paid policemen, detailed to protect children going to and from church schools from the very real hazards of traffic, would serve much the same purpose and accomplish much the same result as state provisions intended to guarantee free transportation of a kind which the state deems to be best for the school children's welfare. And parents might refuse to risk their children to the serious danger of traffic accidents going to and from parochial schools, the approaches to which were not protected by policemen. Similarly, parents might be reluctant to permit their children to attend schools which the state had cut off from such general government services as ordinary police and fire protection, connections for sewage disposal, public [330 U.S. 1, 18]   highways and sidewalks. Of course, cutting off church schools from these services, so separate and so indisputably marked off from the religious function, would make it far more difficult for the schools to operate. But such is obviously not the purpose of the First Amendment. That Amendment requires the state to be a neutral in its relations with groups of religious believers and non-believers; it does not require the state to be their adversary. State power is no more to be used so as to handicap religions, than it is to favor them. "

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

One of your links actually went somewhere that wasn't unsubstantiated far-left mantras, and here's some of the things written there:

quote:

And not all the Deists were that open about it either. Thomas Paine and Ethan Allen were quite open about their Deism, but they didn't hold elective office. Jefferson, in contrast, was quite skeptical of Christianity in his private diaries and letters, but showed up in church when he was running for office. George Washington was, by all appearances, a devout Christian, although Gouveneur Morris wrote in his diary that he thought Washington didn't really believe in Christianity but just did it it for show.
The era of the Founding was quite obviously influenced both by Christianity and by the philosophy of the Enlightenment; anyone who tries to minimize either influence is not telling the whole story.

John Quincy Adams - 1795: “The highest order of the American Revolution was that it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.”

Benjamin Franklin - "He who shall introduce into public affairs the principles of Christianity will change the face of the world.”
John Jay - (first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court) - "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.”
James Madison - (chief architect of the constitution) - “..we have staked the future of all of our political Institutions upon the capacity of all of us to govern ourselves based upon the 10 Commandments of God.”
"I contemplate with sovereign reverence the act of the whole people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof thus building a wall of separation between church and state"
and
"The reason that Christianity is the best friend of Government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart."

Take note of the first quote "legislature should make no law ... building a wall of separation between the church and state"
Thank you, Mr. Jefferson. Read more here

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b44ab97110d.htm

Just a tip - you might want to check those links!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

quote:

ORIGINAL: Foititis

...a crazy religious nutter who is 'a man of moral fiber'.

You can't possibly mean Barack Obama. Can you?

quote:


Obama stopped in Idaho, where caucuses offer a mere 18 delegates on Tuesday, and he worked to reassure Westerners on two fronts.

"I've been going to the same church for more than 20 years, praising Jesus," he told an audience in Boise, warning his listeners not to believe e-mails that falsely say he is a Muslim.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080203/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_rdp;_ylt=Ar2ZEW6ggNpk7znErlO8_EQEtbAF

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

      Christians don't only believe in Heaven, Curious, they also believe in Hell (or accept the metaphors as convenient).  What they believe in is that it matters how you live your life, because there will be a form of judgement.

     You say holding an atheistic view (which I consider just as much a religion) gives you a higher value of life, but wouldn't it also give you carte blanche to live a completely amoral life, since there would never be any justice?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

Actions speak louder than words.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Atheism can be as much turned towards the justification and performance of evil as religion can be.

E

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

And DomKen   I always thought plants and animals are food.
[/quote
KenDckey:
Lets hope that neither your cat or dog can read this post.
thompson

(in reply to KenDckey)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Well, except for the fact that that line isn't in the Constitution anywhere. That's a myth.

You're probably thinking of the first amendment, which reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ."

quote:

The separation of church and state was probably the greatest line in the Constitution ever written.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey 

The way I see it, is that the 1st Amendment seperated the state from the church.   Not necessarily the other way around.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

    I've developed a rule in recent years.  I won't buy goods or services from anyone with the little fish on the business cards or sign.  I figure, if they have to tell me there, I'd never figure it out by how they treat the customer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

And DomKen   I always thought plants and animals are food.
[/quote
KenDckey:
Lets hope that neither your cat or dog can read this post.
thompson

Thompson   When I was in Africa I did eat dog (they eat them in Asia too), monkey and other such fine animals.   Your point is?

(in reply to thompsonx)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

You sure stepped in it this time.

The first Madison quote was made up by David Barton. No scholar has ever been able to find it in the preserved writings of Madison and is at odds with many other things he wrote. Barton's own site admitts he can'tt provide a reference for this quote and asks people to stop using it.
http://candst.tripod.com/misq1.htm
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/capital.asp

I'm not spending the time to research the rest but I'm guessing I can find some problem with the rest as well since they are likely taken from Barton's books.

Unsourced comments are not exactly the wisest things to try and quote from.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey 

The way I see it, is that the 1st Amendment seperated the state from the church.   Not necessarily the other way around.

KenDckey:
Unless you are saying that the state may not meddle in church affairs but the church may meddle in state affairs then this would seem to me to be a distinction without difference.
If the church is allowed to meddle in state affairs what is to prevent the church from becoming the state?
thompson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity
..."Atheism had barely gotten a foothold" statement basically agrees with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The first Madison quote was made up by David Barton.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Who stepped in what. Those quotes were from the links Sugar was posting, from a forums web page. His other links were either dead or they were to shamelessly biased, unsourced far-left political websites.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

You sure stepped in it this time.

....Unsourced comments are not exactly the wisest things to try and quote from.