A right for the religious is a right for the nonreligious

[SecularMotion]

WASHINGTON — Government in America must be neutral among religions and neutral between religion and non-religion — at least that’s how the U.S. Supreme Court interprets the Establishment clause of the First Amendment.

But escalating conflicts involving government treatment of the nonreligious — atheists and humanists — reveal that far too many government officials are confused and conflicted about the meaning of “neutrality.”

In this month alone, an atheist monument stirred controversy in Florida, an atheist applicant for citizenship was instructed to join a church and a congressional committee nixed atheist chaplains.

Let’s start with the first-ever atheist monument, a 1,500-pound bench erected alongside a Ten Commandments monument in front of the Bradford County Courthouse in Starke, Fla.

http://chippewa.com/news/opinion/columns/haynes-a-right-for-the-religious-is-a-right-for/article_a38b3afc-e269-11e2-ad85-0019bb2963f4.html

[pinto]

1. Haynes makes a good fundamental point, no pun intended, in regards Constitutional rights.

First Amendment rights are and should be neutral across the board, short of speech meant to incite violence, etc. or those that run afoul of other Constitutional standards.

(aside) Functionally, not sure if the tit-for-tat in the Bradford situation is an effective tack to take, but they made the point.

[cbayer]

2. I think the founders clearly meant for separation to protect both believers and non-believers.

The monument in florida came about because of a judicial decision that protected a religious icon and is pre-sanctioned by the court. That's a win for non-believers.

The conscientious objector case was settled very rapidly in the woman's favor. That's another win.

The chaplains in the military decision is being challenged, and I wouldn't be surprised if the committee reversed it's decision on this.

The organizations that support secularism are doing a great job of raising legal challenges in cases involving separation issues. The ACLU has also been more actively involved.

[struggle4progress]

3. Welcome Citizen Margaret Doughty (22 June)

... On Thursday, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services retracted their demand that Doughty show proof of religious affiliation and informed her that her application for naturalization had been approved ...
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2013/06/welcome-citizen-margaret-doughty/


... "What actually happened was that I was called down to the floor of the auditorium. I was told that when I say the oath I just don’t say the bit about God." She wasn’t actually given a modified oath <or a chance to modify it>, so when everyone said the oath, including “under God" she was just supposed to leave that part out ...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/01/1220351/-Margaret-Doughty-and-U-S-Immigration

?1372701365