Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ulysses.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!smb
From: smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.politics,net.legal
Subject: Re: religion and public life: texas
Message-ID: <943@ulysses.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 4-Aug-84 18:25:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: ulysses.943
Posted: Sat Aug  4 18:25:56 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 5-Aug-84 00:45:19 EDT
References: <216@imsvax.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 7

I should mention that the phrase "establishment of religion" (in the
First Amendment) has been interpreted by the Supreme Court --
apparently without dissent -- to mean the act of establishing any
religion.  It does not refer to a particular religious establishment.
(Source:  assorted Supreme Court opinions on church-state matters.)

Viewed in this light, the Texas law clearly fails to pass muster.