Roberts? You've Been Served

[Strassia]

@ElvisL1ves

If it has no significant religious content, why does the Religious Right argue for its continuation and preservation, then?

Maybe because it does *too *have such content, and the ruling you’re quoting is somewhere between disingenuous and a simple lie? :dubious:

@Cervaise

Uh huh. As Elvis says, if it has no significant religious content, then why is it always the godbotherers who squeal whenever anybody suggests eliminating it?

I will quote something I put in a different thread on a similar topic:

@Strassia

One thing I would like to add about the topic in general. In my political science class in college, the professor acknowledged that everyone knew that God on the money and other tradition religious entanglements should be struck down by the Supreme Court, but no wants to for the simple reason that if anyone pushed it far enough for the Court to actually take action, the backlash would probably be bad enough to force through an Amendment specifically allowing it, and perhaps a lot more.
If put to a popular vote right now, we would probably be declared a Christian nation.

Jonathan