<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by h2co-pilot:
Because of Santa's commercial aspect, most religions celebrate him for the kids. He is a symbol of the human spirit IMO. The holiday decorations will continue to be part of our spirit no matter the religion, they are just pretty.
Separation of church and state is mandatory and is clearly stated in the Constitution. Christian symbols continue to be displayed in this country's monuments and federal establishments. However, the values upon which those establishments were built were derived from the fundaments of Christianity. I view them not as a threat to that separation but as a historical display.
I am not a "churchy" person, I am more scientific, but I certainly believe that the values taught by that particular religion among others, are truths for a civilized conglomerated society. So I don't have a problem with any of those displays, or any display for that matter. I am not easily influenced by things of that nature so I don't feel it a threat to my belief system.
PS- Everybody wang-chung tonight.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Whoops....I've been reading this thread and enjoying it. While I appreciated most of your post, CP, you are just plain factually wrong on the Constitution. Sorry! It's not your fault, the liberal PC, non-religious media has convinced you AND MOST OF THE COUNTRY that "seperation of church and state" is mandated in our founding document and it just plain AIN'T!
The words are not in there, and neither is the sentiment as commonly understood today. Look at the document (the Constitution) on-line or in any major dictionary's reference section. The only constitutional mandate regarding religion is commonly refered to today as the "establishment clause" contained in Article I of the Bill of Rights in which the founding fathers wrote that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." In the few Supreme Court cases, it has been found mostly on the side of the second part of that clause! Allowing a religious display on public property DOES NOT "establish" a national religion. NOT ALLOWING the display, if the majority of citizens desire it, DOES "prohibit the free exercise thereof."
Now, Jennifer was correct to point folks to the Federalist Papers. These incredible documents give legal scholars an insight into the founding fathers "original intent." Upon reading them, it becomes abundantly clear that they NEVER intended to prevent religion from influencing the government. Quite the contrary - they wanted to make certain the government they were creating could not usurp any or all religions in the new nation - think "Church of England" headed by King George!
I usually avoid these touchy posts and threads. This time, I wanted to make sure our adorable CP just had her facts straight.
Sean