This story is unavailable.

So the question becomes, SCOTUS has for over a century carefully kept the establishment clause neutral, yet those wanting this kind of legislation say they want a “purist” on the bench.

Everytime they try to “legislate” a religious slant, it usually ends up in an expansion and with consequences opposite of their intentions making them scream about judicial activism, or are they just too dense to realize this?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.