Anytime you ask a question where your own answer is blaring out louder than the question itself, at best you'll get support from those who agree with you and blasts from those who disagree. Because the question itself is so skewed, the chances that it will provoke original thinking or serve as a forum for intelligent discussion are slim. EDIT =================== yohoho5: Its possible that I misinterpreted the question. It sounds like you're saying "the bill of rights promised freedom of religion, but corrupt modern culture has turned that into having no religion at all, something the framers could not have imagined. What's wrong with these people?" If that's not what you meant, my apologies. Perhaps a clarifying comment would be helpful. For the record, when I see a "loaded" question, I usually ignore it and move on. The usual thought is "that person is too embedded in their view, not much point in talking". But when I saw this coming from you -- I thought "why is she taking such a polarizing position?", it seemed uncharacteristic. So that's what prompted my answer. If the question came from Anonymous I would have passed.

In the first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" Even at the time these words were written, they were interpreted different ways by different people, so the debates we have now have been more or less on-going. So, does a nativity scene on a courthouse lawn constitute the establishment or free excercise of a religion? Unfortunately, the answer to this question seems to depend firstly on your own religion or lack thereof, secondly on social conventions at large (which explains the evolution of this interpretation), and only marginally on common sense. The original words were subjective to allow for different interpretations over time, so that the bill of rights wouldn't be thrown out the moment society started to change. The price we pay is effectively endless debate, but therein lies the ability to change.