What do the US & state constitutions say about social aspects of the EvC debate?

Ok, you can see where I posted it on another thread at the Coffee house if you want, but note we were already off-topic. For the record, the liberals on the court favored the seizures and interpreting "public use" in the 5th amendment to include private uses which have an indirect public benefit, which effectively makes the term "public" meaningless.But let's take this to the other thread from here on out.This message has been edited by randman, 11-17-2005 01:13 AM

Selective incorporation meant that all except for 2 of the amendments in the bill of rights be included into the 14th amendment and it applies to federal, state, AND local levels. In other words, randman can't even read his own constitution before he started talking about it. He is nitpicking the wrong spot.It surprises me that noone has noticed this before. Randman has been using this flawed argument since... forever.

I find that to be a rather biased view. Lets lean it over a bit the other way:In the 20th century the Supreme Court finally recognized that the religious entities were striving to force religion into our government, schools, and every place they possibly could. They woke up and started to boot religion out of our schools (prayer in the classroom), courtrooms (toss out the ten commandments) and remove overt Christian symbols from government (baby Jesus is as religious as it gets).Do you know of any government that is or was controlled by religious leaders that did not oppress people of other religions, and eventually of their own religion? Christianity has a monstrous history of oppression.That is why we have the first amendment: To keep our government secular. The way the founding fathers wanted it.