quote:

"Remember the Alamo."

quote:

As to policies, many activities by students, such as an elementary school student selecting a bible story as their story to read in class, or a high schooler passing out evangelism tracts at his school locker, are suppressed by school officials, who tout "Separation of Church and State" dogma (for that is truly what it is for many, who know very little of the matter: 'everyone says so').

quote:

What is humerous about the latter story, the one about the kid passing out tracts, is that when the school officials came to tell him to stop, he reached into his locker and pulled out a copy of his state's constitution, which said something to the effect that "religion and morality shall always be taught in the schools of this state." You'll find that a number of state constitutions have similar statements. This was news to his school officials. I believe they let him alone after that incident.

quote:

Originally posted by Stephen:

quote:

Originally posted by FredFlash:

quote:

Today, this figure of speech is accepted by many Americans as a pithy description of the constitutionally prescribed church–state arrangement, and it has become the sacred icon of a strict separationist dogma that champions a secular polity in which religious influences are systematically and coercively stripped from public life.

Who are these strict separationists you claim hold that religous influence are to to be systematically and coercively stripped from public life? According to google, you are are the only one who has ever used the phrase "systematically and coercively stripped from public life."

FredFlash, you make me laugh. Thank you!
Only a guess, but perhaps it is a paraphrase for a plethora of actions which are well documented?

quote:

In other words, a metaphor is a word or phrase that expresses an idea.

The honorable member has introduced the subject of religion. Religion is not guarded--there is no bill of rights declaring that religion should be secure. Is a bill of rights a security for religion? Would the bill of rights, in this state, exempt the people from paying for the support of one particular sect, if such sect were exclusively established by law? If there were a majority of one sect, a bill of rights would be a poor protection for liberty. Happily for the states, they enjoy the utmost freedom of religion. This freedom arises from that multiplicity of sects, which pervades America, and which is the best and only security for religious liberty in any society. For where there is such a variety of sects, there cannot be a majority of any one sect to oppress and persecute the rest. Fortunately for this commonwealth, a majority of the people are decidedly against any exclusive establishment--I believe it to be so in the other states. There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermeddle with religion. Its least interference with it, would be a most flagrant usurpation. I can appeal to my uniform conduct on this subject, that I have warmly supported religious freedom. It is better that this security should be depended upon from the general legislature, than from one particular state. A particular state might concur in one religious project. But the United States abound in such a variety of sects, that it is a strong security against religious persecution, and it is sufficient to authorise a conclusion, that no one sect will ever be able to outnumber or depress the rest.

--James Madison; Virginia Ratifying Convention; 12 June 1788; Papers of James Madison 11:130--31