Just so you know, intent/purpose is crucial to the issue:
The Lemon Test
To assist both themselves and the lower courts on decisions in these matters, it must first be determined if the act of the governmental body (whether law or conduct) can and should be considered as a violation of the establishment clause, and the three part test for this is taken from the case of Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971).
whether it has a secular purpose
whether it has as its primary or principle effect advancing or inhibiting religion, and
whether it fosters an excessive entanglement of government with religion.
This test has not proved to be easy to apply, and has allowed decisions of all kinds by the lower courts, as it is possible to make a contrary decision on the same set of circumstances with a different panel of judges, according to Stephen Carter, Professor of Law at Yale University, in his book Culture of Disbelief. . Sandra Day O’Connor, in her partial concurrence in the case of Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 688 (1984), proposes the court also question whether the government is, by their law or conduct, endorsing or disapproving of religion and/or religious belief. (Gaustad’s Church and State in America contains a portion of her opinion that includes these comments). |
