(1) My education’s just fine. I wrote the post in a style I euphemistically refer to as “Mid-19th Century Rural Vernacular”. I did that because: (A) No one actually speaks that way and (B) It seemed to infer a response based more on common sense than intellectualism. If you didn’t get that, my bad.
(2) When it comes to U.S. law as it applies to the founding fathers of our country and the Constitution you, unfortunately, don’t know your gluteus maximus from your elbow (if you even know what that means).
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …” The point of the amendment was twofold. First, it ensured that religious beliefs - private or organized - were removed from attempted government control. This is the reason why the government cannot tell either you or your church what to believe or to teach. Second, it ensured that the government didn’t get involved with enforcing, mandating, or promoting particular religious doctrines. This is what happens when the government "establishes" a church - and because doing so created so many problems in Europe, the authors of the Constitution wanted to try and prevent the same from happening here. And by the way, some of the originators of those words weren’t even religious. It was all about HAVING religious liberty, not the other way around.
YOU apparently don’t understand that. Don’t feel bad about that. That’s only because you either didn’t take the time to really study the subject or you’ve just never been competent enough to tackle the subject in the first place. That’s not you fault. You were just born that way.
As to the business of keeping my ideas out of the public arena: I will continue to exercise my right of free speech in any arena I choose just as you have that right. Of course the difference is when you choose to exercise that right you just embarrass yourself.
More information about formatting options