state flower, state bird, state religion

[Ryan]

Do these people not even READ the Constitution/Bill Of Rights? Doesn't this fly in the face of the separation of church and state? Or am I just crazy?

State bill proposes Christianity be Missouri’s official religion

... The resolution would recognize "a Christian god," and it would not protect minority religions, but "protect the majority's right to express their religious beliefs.

The resolution also recognizes that, "a greater power exists," and only Christianity receives what the resolution calls, "justified recognition."

http://www.kmov.com/topstories/stories/030206ccklrKmovreligionbill.7d361c3f.html

[Phishfan]

The link is no longer valid. That's pretty wild though. We are about to see some major Constitutional battles now that we have a new Supreme Court. I have read where one state (SD I believe) has passed a bill outlawing most abortions. The governor is expected to sign it. I read where there was a second state (MS maybe) that has a bill outlawing all abortions except in the case to save the mother's life (no clauses for rape or incest) and if it passes the governor is expected to sign it as well.

[MaineDolFan]

It's more than just an issue of a seperation of church and state, this also falls into freedom of religon.  Yes - I understand the bill doesn't FORCE anyone to one or another, but the adoption of one as "an official religion" sets the same under tones that people fled England for the colonies for.

...not to mention that there might be one or two people living in that state that believe the only greater power is a cup of coffee.

[Househead]

Its going to be really interesting if the SD anti-abortion law passes and it is then challenged in the courts as it will present the first direct challenge to the legality of Roe v. Wade and could be decisive blow against abortion rights if the Sup. Ct. hears the case on appeal and upholds the law (thereby effectively overruling Wade) after it had been struck down by a lower court (which it in all likelyhood will be), or a decisive blow against anti-abortion activists if the Sup. Ct. either (i) refuses to hear the case after the law has been struck down, or (ii) hears the case and rules in favor of the illegality of the law.  Even with Alito and Roberts and the court shifting far more towards the right, its still questionable whether the Sup Ct will have the 5 required votes to uphold the South Dakota law.  As it all unfolds, it will be pretty interesting to watch.

[Ryan]

here's another link to a similar article.

http://blogs.citypages.com/canderson/2006/03/state_bill_prop.asp