Schools across the nation have been teaching religion, in a historical context, for several years, with the blessing of the USSC.

There may be a lawsuit, but no grounds for one. Perhaps King Roi would take one on.

Not all of the Founding Fathers were Christians, and many who had a faith in Jesus as the Christ would not share your thoughts on the limited origin of our Constitutional system.

The tinkers of the Enlightenment had great impact on the writers of our constitution. These liberal thinkers of the Era of Enlightenment and Age of Reason advocated rationality as a means to establish an authoritative system of ethics, aesthetics, and knowledge.

The most fervent source of the concept of separation of church and state is Roger Williams a very religious Christian. Williams understood that the people who had come to the New World for religious freedom did so to escape having other people's religion forced down their throat.

The separation of church and state that the founding fathers addressed in the constitution was about forbidding the government dictating a religion, as was the case in England for several hundred years, and ensuring that the citizens were free to practice whatever religion they chose. The same amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law establishing religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof..........."

The majority of USSC rulings in the last half of the 20th century has completely ignored that part of the amendment after the first comma, ie, "nor prohibit the free exercise thereof"..........

An elective course at any high school certainly doesn't equal shoving ones religion down anyone's throat.

In part I can buy into an elective course, and nothing wrong with a pagan chant over food at school lunch, and how about some witchcraft at the pep rally—put a hex on the opponent. If you were not into any of those things, you could not go, sit quietly, or just pretend you liked it.

How else to rename islewood? These postings have to be in jest. This and other postings from islewood have made me reach a decision about them:

1. I will read his/hers only for comic relief.
2. Assume they are simply written to spur controversy.

Islewood, the game is up. Time to assume another pen name and began your senseless rants all over again.

As far as it goes for the Bible class, it is an elective. Not to be done at a pep rally. Get a life!

Oh my, a pep rally is mandatory? I guess no child left behind.

I like that new moniker, “Isleweird.” Maybe I could teach the parts of the Bible that deal with tall stories, like that tower of Babel thing. Even me Irish uncs would not be able to spin that tall of a tale.

Ok, ok! So that Biblical account is a parable that deals with mankind’s’ arrogance? I got it (well maybe arrogance too). Moses and Jesus and the scribe of Scripture were always telling those parables--the trick is to know when a parable is one. If you cannot understand that you are going to end up believing some very comic stuff.

Speaking of things comic, so you need comic relief? Why not get some funny laxative? You could laugh your … well something off anyway.

About getting a life. You got a used “life” for sale or something? Do you unload one of those at a rummage sale—take in its current condition?

See, I knew it. I read it and laughed my rear off and didn't even need the laxative.

There you have it, some faith healing.