challenged in the Supreme Court and, if so, what rationale was used to
uphold it? When you talk about religion with French people, they always seem unable to believe that we actually have separation of church and state. Every
Frenchman you talk to will immediately bring up the fact that the president says God Bless America and that Congress starts its sessions
with a prayer. When you point out that nobody can forbid the president
or Congress to talk about God, they will then cite In God We Trust. (I
swear, it's like they're reading from a catechism.) At that point, I'm
forced to concede that they have a point. But they're always genuinely
surprised to hear that that courts regularly strike down laws that improperly give money to churches or permit organized prayer. Seth <<<<<>>>>>
There have been several lower federal court decisions regarding above with decisions in each instances holding the motto is ceremonial and symbolic rather than religous. I don't recall the Supreme Court agreeing to hear appeals from any of these cases.
The framers did not mention God in the 1787 constitution and they included word *religion* only to prohibit religious tests to qualify for elective office. Most delegates to the Philadelphia convention were not irreligious, in fact, some were from states with established religions. Given the degree of dviersity among them, however, they appear to have been in general agreement that religion should neither drive national government nor should it come under the domain of national government. As for Amendment I, neither of the religious clauses - *establishment* and *exercise* - define religion.
Predominant nineteenth century First Amendment interpretation held the included freedoms to be proscriptions against the national government. Even the generally irreligious Jefferson's early 1800s letter to Danbury, Connecticut Baptist ministers indicated as much.
Not until the 1950s/1960s Warren Court did the Supreme Court raise the wall of separation between church and state. In fact, I don't recall a Supreme Cout justice using Jefferson's phrase about a 'wall of separation between church and state' until Associate Justice Robert Jackson did in a concurring late 1940s opinion. In any event, the Warren Court *wall* has been lowered in the last couple of decades. The majority opinion in _Lynch v Donnelly_ (1984) asserted that the diistinction between the two realms is blurred and variable. Michael Hoover
Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this e-mail communication may be subject to public disclosure.