Now, I can see that there may be some loopholes, such as, fine-tuning is only required for our type of life, and that God is alive but is a different type of life. But if this is true, then that leaves open the possibility that there are other types of life that do not require the same finely-tuned conditions that we require.

I think the more accurate way to think of the monotheistic God would have to be as not a living being, if he is to be an eternal and immutable being. You could throw more wrinkles into the story by saying that God perhaps is not eternal and not immutable. Maybe God did start to “live” at some point, and maybe God could “die” at some point, which would seem to be the requirements for calling God a living god. I don’t think that most monotheists are willing to consider this sort of handicapping the Supreme Being though.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

You hold a common misconception. The Establishment Clause does prohibit the establishment of a religion for the states, and it does prevent the government from promoting any specific religions, sects, denominations, or beliefs.

The best evidence of what the Establishment Clause means comes from Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who were the authors of the Virginia statutes of religious freedom and the Declaration of Independence and Constitution and Bill of Rights respectively.

Madison, for example, said, “Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity in exclusion of all other religions may establish, with the same ease, any particular sect of Christians in exclusion of all other sects? That the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute threepence only of his property for the support of any one establishment may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?” From, A Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, addressed to the Virginia General Assembly, June 20, 1785.

There was no “lawgiver.” See, Source of law is not religion.

There absolutely is such a thing as church/state separation. The US has no official religion. Tradition cannot change the fact that we have a godless Constitution. If the US was founded on Christianity, then the Founding Fathers sure fooled us when they (President Adams and the unanimous vote of the Senate in 1797) signed this: “… the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion …” in the Treaty of Tripoli.

There is no secular purpose to government-sponsored prayer. People can pray on their own. No one, from the government to the ACLU, has ever said that people cannot pray on their own. When the government steps in and endorses a national day of prayer, then it is endorsing religion. This, it cannot constitutionally do. I would not so lightly be willing to say that prayer is no longer a religious activity.

The Costitution was written so the common man could grasp it and understand its meaning.

Pehaps interpret means the hidden intent of the statute or what the author meant when the law was promulgated.Judges should not be interpreting laws.The intent of the lawgiver should be clear and concise and precise.The courts apparently do not concern themselves why the law was written but only whether it is constitutional.

The greatness of this country was founded on and grounde in the Christian Religion and Faith.It has been said there is no official religion of the US.This is erroneous.Tradition occurs through constant repetition expressed by the will of the people and the people willed the Christian Religion and its principles to be costantly exercised.Tradition has the force of law.Christianity is therefore the law of the land and is the official Religion.

The state owes its existence to the Christian Religion and can never repay the debt.

The government is obliged to promote an atmosphere in which the Christian Religion can flourish.

The state may make men good but religion is necessary to preserve that state of goodness and actually makes men better,virtuous,just,honest, by teaching moral values as something good and desirable.The state does not do this. But morality and virtue are absolutely necessary if the state is to contimue in existence.

So it is the state that needs Christianity if it wishes to survive.

There is no such thing as separation of Church and state.

Christianity teaches love of neighbor but not the legal system.A murderer is not put to death on the premiss that he did not love his neighbor.

The official religion of this country is Christianity and it is obvious and without it the state will not exist for long.

Judge Crabb just recently ruled that the National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional because it had no secular purpose.She errs.Men and women pray for a number of reasons but it makes them better and better citizens.As a matter of fact the whole purpose of the Christian Religion is directed to the secular sphere to make men and women better citizens,perhaps even holy, which benefits the common good of the state.

In conclusion the state actually has the obligation to promote Christianity and this can be done very easily.Vouchers is one example. Also destributive justice is involved.Christianity is the official religion of this country.

The Supreme Court had no authority to remove school prayer and Bible reading in the classroom.The Supreme Court’s decisions are not to be considered absolutely final in constitutional questions touching upon the powers of the state.School prayer should be left up to the individual communities whether they be hamlets,villages,towns,cities,or munciipalities.The Governors of the states have the authority to reinstitute school prayer if they wish but either don’t know it,or are afraid to do it,ordon’t know their rights,or think they have to follow the courts and are intimidated.

Congress cannot prohibit school prayer and so neither can the courts.