Originally Posted by Senator Hatrack
If you truly do believe in the Jeffersonian definition of the establishment of religion you would also say that Lemon v. Kurtzman is wrong. But you didn't. Instead you cited it as a good example of how the Supreme Court has correctly ruled on the separation of church and state.
I'm sorry, SH, but you missed the principle point of the First Amendment Establishment clause. It does not say "a religion". Any where. Go look... I'll wait.

Okay, no I won't. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"... Establishment comes in many forms, which is why the SCt established the Lemon test. Funding is just the most obvious. Putting up religious iconography is another (easy) one (Ten Commanments, Crosses). How about if the government established a policy of not serving pork or beef in any government cafeterias or exempting pork or beef products from FDA or USDA regulation?

Your interpretation of Jefferson is... Unique. I see no conflict between Lemon and Jefferson.
Quote
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."
Maybe you can explain that?