Wow. Really. The Church Of England exists today unmolested yet not quite as powerful as it was in its heyday. It is still recognized as the national religion

Here. Lets break it down nice and easy. We live under a non-secular government. If we did not and Christianity was our "ACTUAL" national religion we would live in an entirely different country.

Yes the majority of our population is still Christian. This still does not make our national religion christianity. A Secular Government has a recognized National Religion which takes part in the day to day operations and decisions of the government. This creates an atmosphere which is not conducive to secular or even non-secular freedom of speech. Our Forefathers both christian and not (alot of them played the part in order to acquire thier positions) saw the need for both secular and non-secular freedom of speech. So they created our government entirely from humanistic law. Laws based entirely upon human morality and not divine law.

As can be seen it does need to be polished up but so far it is turning out to be the best government out there. I wonder why???

From Wikiepidia

The First Amendment to the US Constitution explicitly forbids the U.S. federal government from enacting any law respecting a religious establishment, and thus forbids either designating an official church for the United States, or interfering with State and local official churches — which were common when the First Amendment was enacted. It did not prevent state governments from establishing official churches. Connecticut continued to do so until she replaced her colonial Charter with the Connecticut Constitution of 1818; Massachusetts did not disestablish its official church until 1833, more than forty years after the ratification of the First Amendment; and local official establishments of religion persisted even later.

The Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, ratified in 1868, makes no mention of religious establishment, but forbids the states to "abridge the privileges or immunities" of U.S. citizens, or to "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." However, since 1947, Everson v. Board of Education, the United States Supreme Court has held that this later provision incorporates the First Amendment's Establishment Clause as applying to the States, and thereby presumably prohibits state and local religious establishments. The exact boundaries of this prohibition are still disputed, and are a frequent source of cases before the US Supreme Court — especially as the court must now reconcile this post-1947 view with the original First Amendment clause that explicitly prohibits any restraint on the free exercise of religion.

All current U.S. State Constitutions include guarantees of religious liberty parallel to the First Amendment, but at least one (North Carolina) also prohibits atheists from holding public office[1].

because it is unbiased atleast on paper, which includes things other then religion.

iam not sure where you got the idea that there were unreligious forefathers but please substantiate it would be an interesting read

humanistic laws thats laughable where do you thing they got this from.

all say it again its about creating a national goverment that works with multiple religions, heritages creeds ect. The constitution encourages a diverse national state that is what makes this particular goverment so successful

State Law must adhere to Federal Mandate. As can be seen by the Medical Marijuana fiasco in California and elsewhere. The locals will not bust you but the Feds just might

Here. For your further education.

Article Six of The United States Constitution.

"" All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

As you can see the Federal Government can and will enforce the US Constitution within a state if they must. And the state must acquiesce. Or we go to war.

I have no argument with your last statement. Of course this country is diverse and it is that diversity which MUST be defended in all cases.
The government itself is completely non-secular and created from moral law and not divine law. Laws based on human logic and deduction. Not laws based on divine word or divine faith. There is a huge difference between the two.

This in and of itself based entirely on its success shows that a non-secular government can be succesful and far more productive.

As I stated earlier. When religious sects control entire governments the results are bloody. May I point a steady finger at the present Middle-East

Oh. That athiest law you spoke of...... would be thrown out of court pretty quickly and the poor athiest could sue

And just for fun.

Billy. You know who James Madison is right???

Fourth President of the United States. Known as "The Father Of The Constitution".

You know him right?

His original unaltered Ammendment concerning Religion is as follows-

""''The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretence, infringed.''

In the senate the language was as follows-

""Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith, or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion, ""

The House had somewhat of the same language-

"Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience."

In the conference comittee of the two bodies, chaired by James Madison the language we know now was penned.

As you can see the President of the United States wrote that he wanted seperation of church and state by saying that no national religion could be created.

Yep. Good old James Madison. The Fourth President.

A. I took it from wikipedia i didnt make it up if they did well hey it is the internet

B. Following the letter of the consitition: no religion can be mandated as a quilification of office, technichaly athiesism isnt a religion.

divine law is moral law there one and the same, the religions of the world are constructs of man/society are they not?

its always bloody, may i point my finger at wounded knee? or the trail of tears, or slavery.

Mankind needs to stop blaming religion for its problems and take some resbonisbility. The people of the middle east would be fanatical with or with out Islamic Rule. Futhermore not all the nations are at war see Saudia Arbia could this be because the econmic state of that country is alot diffrent then that of the people of Iran and Palastine ect.

Saudi Arabia is a Monarchy

Iran and Palestine are Secular governments

The laws of the land are both based on Islamic Principles, what does it matter who enforces them

Whats interesting is the standard of living gap.

One is a Monarchy and one is Secular. One enforces the laws by the hand of god the other by the hand of a man.

Divine laws are known for being very inflexable and unforgiving.

theres been lots of forgiving kings to.

god doesnt punish anyone on earth. even the islamic extremests know this. The islamic laws are open to interpreation by the ruleing party. So are our christian based laws. That interpration is done by man god has nothing to do with it. But just for arguments sake did you know that court trials in Saudia Arabia are held in religious courts and the Quran is the constitution of the land so appaerntly they have "divine" law as well. "Some more education for you"

On a side note; Let me ask you, do you think it is better to have a forgiving legal system or an unforgving one.

And here I was thinking that the writing is what we were going by, ya know the
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion part. Its just funny when you religon haters read that you need to interject your own special meaning towards it. I want to believe it means that all left handed people must be given an anual salary by the federal government of 1 million dollars because of religion persecution of lefties in the middle ages!