now to get real..the ACLU Was great 50 years ago and it stood up for people; now it stands for nothing but a race and political idea that is dead. all people have a point to understand but the ACLU Has no new ideals and can’t see the real world.

The constitutional guarantee of religious freedom was a direct response to why this country was originally colonized. For those who are history educationally challenged, I would suggest you research the English Civil War and the 30 Years War. These are both examples of one or more Christian religious sects going to war against other Christian sects over disagreements in doctrine and dogma. They were both notoriously bloody and the fighting savage. The modern equivalent would be a civil war in Iraq of the Sunnis versus the Shiite. The founders were simply trying to insure that nothing of that sort happened here.

There are two parts to that comment on religion in the 1st Amendment. One says “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion”. School prayer DOES NOT VIOLATE THIS because THERE IS NO LAW PASSED BY CONGRESS REQUIRING IT. The second part of the comment on religious freedom in this country is “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. Now if Congress isn’t allowed to limit the free exercise of religion, why are the courts giving themselves powers that even Congress doesn’t have?

Any precedent that declares that school prayer unconstitutional or the Boy Scouts is a religious organization because its oath includes the word God, is patently absurd when compared to the actual wording of the Constitution.

There are those who believe that the Constitution is a “Living, Breathing document” the meaning of which is to be determined by 9 unaccountable black robed judges. It is a living, breathing growing document alright, but the way it grows is through the amendment process, not the appeals process. The system was set up so that changes to our most important legal document would be by a two thirds majority consensus and take the time necessary to insure that those changes be thought through thoroughly, not hastily made by nine people with no accountability if and when they get it wrong. The system works very well most of the time.(the 18th amendment that started prohibition was a bad idea, and I’m not so sure that 18 yr olds are really politically savvy enough to be voting.) But the Supreme Court has made worse mistakes. The Dred Scott decision being one. It’s easier to repeal a bad amendment than it is to overturn a bad Supreme Court decision. The people can easily see when an amendment is bad and vote to repeal it. The justices on the Supreme Court aren’t that easily convinced and the appeals process is designed to be long and arduous.