Nothing in there indicates that the intention was as is now being practiced. In fact, all of the activities I have used as examples were supported by the very people you want to say would now have found those actions unConstitutional.
Just as easy for you to find them. Just google " coach sued for leading prayer " and you will get hundreds of examples. Then you could google " christian students suspended by schools "
Google " schools required to teach muslim religion "
The Jewish religion outs more emphasis on the Talmud, and Menorah. I don't know of any case where that has been ajudicated. However, there was an incident in the Seattle Airport in the past couple of years, and the Menorah was allowed to be displayed. There was another one last year, and thatwas settled by allowing a Christmas tree, a Menorah, and a sign by the Athiest group, to be displayed.
Why? the person has no obligation to pray. They can just listen, and think about something else. Point is, for 200 years it was not a problem.
Been there, done that, doesn't matter to me.
In its teachings in the schools it is made obvious that there was a "big bang", or that man evolved from some kind of sea creature, or wahtever, then the progressive line of evolution through the apes to the primitive humanoids, etc. God is never mentioned, and is denied everytime one tries to introduce creationism in whatever form it may take whether it be in a separate class, or by a student.
That is not the way it is taught. And you are right. Evolution as being taught cannot be proven.
The Bible can be divided into several distinct sections, or purposes. The "snake" in the Garden of Eden, Jonah and the Whale, Noah and the Flood, the Tower of Babel, are just a few examples of allegorical teachings based on tradition. Then there are the true historical accounts such as Exodus, the destruction of Jerusalem, etc. The next would be Law, and then there is Prophecy. Each contains a purpose, and teachings as to the mind, and power, of God.
Most, if not all, are homosexual by choice unless you have some scientific evidence I am not aware of.
Neither of the lawsuits were successful just as the one against the BSA was not.
Well, one does anyway. The other is based on the ignoring of much of the science.
In this case yes. They are the ones most vocal. Then too, I have heard many politicians on C-Span, other activist groups, and entertainers such as Danny Glover, say the same thing. Most are just seeking more money, or other gratuities, from the government.
That is too vague when the "rights of others" is in a constant flux.
e.g Muslims, and other cultures, believe that a man can have sex with a child, or arrange a "marriage" with a child.
In Saudi Arabia a woman can be killed for simply talking to a man other then a family member, or husband.
Here in the States virtual kiddy porn has been deemed legal.
In Iowa the courts just ruled that teenagers can strip dance as long as it is in a "theatre" even if that theatre has been converted to a strip club.
