<p>Quick, tonight the Jim Lehrer News Hour has a report on religious tolerance at USAFA.</p>
<p>Did anyone catch this? I missed it but sure am curious if there was any new news.</p>
<p>I found a link that answers my own question!</p>
<p>If i read things right (the image at the end), if a person is unwantedly (that a word?) kissed, since they define sexual assult as that, while they were breaking all the rules in the academy, they will go unpunished?</p>
<p>That link is really old, March 2003. Roche and Jumper have been gone for months.</p>
<p>AFDAD- except that link was about sexual assult in 2003, not religious tolerence.</p>
<p>This is the right link...</p>
<p>Sorry folks, thanks afa81 for posting the right link!</p>
<p>I asked about that at Summer seminar '05. My element leader said that the whole thing was blown out of proportion by the media. That was his opinion, anyway.</p>
<p>It was. My room is crazy...I'm a Baptist, one roommate is Mormon, and the other is Buddhist</p>
<p>no it's not. there are still official government functions there (a retirement comes to mind), where everyone was asked to pray. then some cadet gets up there and starts leading this christian prayer.</p>
<p>If the person being honored (in the retirement you speak of) is of the Christian faith, thats not at all uncalled for. Plus, no one in a situation like that is being forced against their will to pray for something they don't believe in.</p>
<p>Should they have all pleased the one Buddhist in the room?</p>
<p>according to current law, they should please noone. even a moment of silence has been ruled unconstitutional in public schools, by the supreme court in 1985 (currently being challenged). it's taxpayer money. it's an official government function, not a christian day camp. it's illegal. read the air force's official policy statement. nowhere else in the US govt is it so baldfaced as at USAFA (even at the other 2 service academies), but then again almost everyone who applies here knows that. it's probably one of the main draws.</p>
<p>The words "separation of church and state" appears in neither the U.S. Constitution, nor the Declaration of Independence, nor even the Federalist Papers. They are neither the law nor part of the legilative history of the law.</p>
<p>The Constitution says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Thus, Congress, that is the U.S. Congress, is prohibited from forcing all people to ascribe to a single religion as they dictate. In other words, they cannot force religion upon the American people. Further, the Congress shall never, under any circumstances, prohibit the free exercise of religion. This means that Congress shall not make any law that would prohibit people, in any way, from practicing their religion.</p>
<p>The first word in the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution says it all: Congress. The first amendment applies to Congress, period. It was intended to prohibit Congress from saying, "Religion X is the religion of the land, and we will establish the United States Church of X". This is what Britain did and it is not what we wanted.</p>
<p>The clause above, in the first amendment, has been bastardized and obfuscated to such a point that people believe it is "illegal" to practice religion. In essence, the phrase is doing exactly the opposite of its intent. Congress, and even farther out to the judiciary and executive branches on all levels of government, is essentially attempting to make it illegal to practice religion, thereby establishing a "religion" in a secular manner. The original intent of the first clause in the first amendment was to allow people the free exercise of religion. What it has done is just the opposite.</p>
<p>I believe "separation of church and state" is one of Jefferson's ideas. He wrote it somewhere, but don't quote me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Thomas Jefferson's famous "wall of separation" between church and state comment was made in a letter to a group of Baptist clergymen January 1, 1802 in Danbury, Connecticut, who feared the Congregationalists Church would become the state-sponsored religion. Jefferson assured the Danbury Baptist Association that the First Amendment guaranteed that there would be no establishment of any one denomination over another. It was never intended for our governing bodies to be "separated" from Christianity and its principles. The "wall" was understood as one directional; its purpose was to protect the church from the state. The world was not to corrupt the church, yet the church was free to teach the people Biblical values. It keeps the government from running the church but makes sure that Christian principles will always stay in government.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The chaplain's corps in the military is actually based on the first amendment. Case law determined that sending soldiers abroad without spiritual support would be "prohibiting" the "free exercise" of their religion.</p>
<p>"according to current law, they should please noone. even a moment of silence has been ruled unconstitutional in public schools, by the supreme court in 1985 (currently being challenged). it's taxpayer money. it's an official government function, not a christian day camp. it's illegal. read the air force's official policy statement. nowhere else in the US govt is it so baldfaced as at USAFA (even at the other 2 service academies), but then again almost everyone who applies here knows that. it's probably one of the main draws"</p>
<p>Remember, religious tolerance goes both ways. Even though Christians were the ones who were supposedly intolerant, it doesn't mean you get to be intolerant to them.</p>
<p>Quote: "It's clear that they had seen entirely too many religious wars and religious tyrannies in Europe, and thus that they did want to make sure that no specific church or creed had authority over the State."
the above quote would imply that the framers did intend a seperation of any church, christian or otherwise, and state.</p>