Forgot your password?  Comment: Re:Oklahoma? (Score 1) 1161  by
de Selby (#27099461) Attached to: Oklahoma, Vatican Take
Opposite Tacks On Evolution  I'm not so sure about your take on
the 1st Amendment. It is for freedom of religion, not freedom
from religion. It is just that there cannot be a national
religion that is forced upon the populace.   I think it really
was going for not forcing a religion no anyone...but, not that
any religion could never be spoken about. The mere presence of a
mention or investigation into religion is not forcing anything
upon anyone else..it isn't like you won't pass a course if you
don't convert.  I think there's been some miscommunication.  A
common slogan on this topic is "freedom of religion implies
freedom from religion". That's because "freedom from" means
exactly what you're offering as an alternative--we are not
legally required to have a religion and we are protected from
religion being imposed against our will.  Comment:
Re:Hypocritical? (Score 3, Interesting) 676  by