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.