What is the difference? If public displays of religious symbols are allowed, what is the difference between an officially mandated religion and a casual inference?
If government at any level provides a 'peep hole' of preference to religion at its core, there is no separation of church and state.
This is dangerous business. It is a slippery slope and it is treated by Republicans as if it is a real issue. It isn't.
The citizens of the USA are allowed to practice whatever faith they choose in the way they choose it. This isn't even an issue.
Creating a 'Designer Issue' is about compromising the USA Constitution, it isn't about impingement of government on personal rights. IF ANYTHING, the insistence by the Republicans that the USA should 'help people be religious' is an impingement on personal rights.
The Republicans are Anti-Civil Rights, from race to sexual identity to religious freedom.
Sarah Palin's 'Christian Nation' Remarks Spark Debate
Advocates of Church-State Separation Say Palin Is Distorting Founders' Intent
But two groups dedicated to the separation of church and state are now speaking out against her, arguing that she is misreading the founders' intent.
"It's incredibly hypocritical that Sarah Palin, who disapproves of government involvement in just about anything, now suddenly wants the government to help people be religious," Barry Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, told ABC News.
"It is wildly inconsistent with her views on limited government to get the government involved in matters of faith."...
