It is not the government’s job to acknowledge religion of any kind and no one I know would support such a position. The only people who do are religious conservatives. If they didn’t they wouldn’t be fighting tooth and nail to keep the words “under God” in the pledge.
Reading various religious right and other political conservative writings on the issue of the “religion of secularism” one would get the idea that there is a “religion of secularism” and that it is trying to corrupt “our children” and “our values”. Evolution, sex education, abortion and everything else against their beliefs is seen as the creed of the “religion of secularism”.
Being that this website is called the Secular Left, you can be sure that the religious right is wrong on all accounts. But don’t take my word for it, let the evidence back me up.
The speakers at the event, calling for judges who rule based on their religious bias rather than rational logic, were a who’s who of the usual religious hypocrites we know and “love”.
Raspberry, not known to be a religious conservative, none the less presents the common myth that removing the Decalogue from government buildings and property is the same as removing religion from the public sphere and that it is anti-religious.
Scalia has looked out upon the nations of the world where the government endorses certain religious ideas and not others – Saudi Arabia, China, Sudan – and decided that the United States should join in.
While the rulings were a split decision, it seems the court is applying the same guidelines it applied in testing the legality of Christmas Nativity scenes placed on public property. It is all about the context and intent.