>> 2. I believe that *you and I both know* that the ACLU has a double
>> standard regarding free speech; specifically that "religious speech"
>> should be more restricted than generic speech.
But doesn't that "double standard" come directly from the constitution?
Religious speech *should* be restricted in cases where it could be
construed as an endorsement by the government (i.e. in public school
science classes). At least, that seems to be the way the constitution
is interpreted nowadays.
For reference:
AMENDMENT I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
-- Jim Foley Symbios Logic, Fort Collins, COJim.Foley@symbios.com (970) 223-5100 x9765 I've got a plan so cunning you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel. -- Edmund Blackadder