Although John tries to discount the Founders' views on religion and secularism based on the fact that many of them were slave owners--a morally abhorrent practice--he is guilty of using an unfair standard of judgement. One must remember that slavery was a common occurrence in the 1700s (and still continues to this day in Africa) and the Founders were part of that era. In order to assure agreement amongst all the colonies for declaring independence from England, a compromise was made knowing the issue would be revisited once the British shackles that bound all colonists were first removed. The founding of the United States was the precondition for the universal recognition of inalienable human rights and one can not fault the Founders for making a compromise that was necessary in order to bring about the conditions that would largely banish slavery from the planet.

William Smith draws attention to Cathy Kowalkowski's letter to the editor regarding State Representative Daryl Metcalfe that appeared in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. I believe Ms. Kowalkowski is right to highlight the fact that the controversy over Metcalfe's remarks could have been averted if no one had introduced the resolution which, in addition to honoring a Muslim community group, called religion the "bedrock of our nation's founding." I believe resolutions such as this have no real place in a secular republic. Unfortunately, members of both major political parties are so accustomed to pandering to religious groups that Ms. Kowalkowski's admonishment will, unfortunately, fall on deaf ears. More evidence of the pandering to religious groups can be seen in Senator Barack Obama's recent overtures to evangelicals and his co-opting of the horrendous "Faith-based Initiatives" of President Bush.

I also would like to thank Lisa Weisenstein for her compliments but would also like to say that, unlike Ms. Weisenstein and John, I find Joe from Butler's efforts to bring the actual positions of the Founders into this debate to be laudable.