“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion----” is usually interpreted to mean that the government shall not establish any religion as the official religion of the state and shall not favor any one religion over all others.

If this is the proper interpretation, then how do we justify putting “In God We Trust” on our coins and currency, or inserting the words “under God” in the pledge of allegiance? Both of these were acts of Congress, and both favor theism over Budhism, Hinduism, paganism, wicca, atheism and plain non-belief.

Is this not a violation of the law established in the Constitution?

Thoughts On The Separation Of Church And State

Consider this:

1) Has there ever been any religious person who, if he could have it his way, would not have liked to see governments run by people whose theology was the same as his own?

2) Since the existence of a deity can not be proved, i.e. substantiated by scientific evidence, can there ever be any consensus as to what is theological truth?

3) If there can be no consensus, doesn’t it make sense to have a secular government in order to insure that no one theocracy dominates the rest?

4) Isn’t the above what the writers of our constitution had in mind when they stipulated that “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof---”?

5) Doesn’t our very freedom require that no government shall ever dictate to religion and no religion shall ever dictate to the government?

If...