FOXNews.com - Conn. Town Can't Hold Graduations in Church, Judge Rules

FOXNews.com - Conn. Town Can't Hold Graduations in Church, Judge Rules

A Federal judge has ruled that two Connecticut high schools cannot hold their graduation in a Church because it "unconstitutionally entangled itself with religion by agreeing to cover much of the church's religious imagery. She also says the town coerced the plaintiffs to support religion by forcing them to enter the church". What in the world does that mean? "Entangle itself with religion by agreeing to cover much of the church's religious imagery", does that mean if the they did NOT cover the imagery it would be OK? How is walking into a building a form of coerced participation, endorsement or even acknowledgment of other events that occur within the building? If you walk into an apartment building does that designate support of all events that are occurring or have occurred or will occur within the building? How can government inspectors go into a church, synagogue or mosque without entangle itself with religion?
What of the pathetic people who sued to prevent this graduation ceremony? Do they think that they will start speaking in tongues and baptizing people uncontrollably? Presumably they were trying to prevent themselves and others from being exposed to religion. When did this become a right? When did the right to protect people from having to view any religious iconography or setting become more important that the rights of ordinary citizens to go about their daily lives without having the state micro manage their daily lives? Where is it in the Constitution that the rights of these anti-religion zealots can trump the rights of ordinary citizens to watch their sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, cousins and friends from graduating from high school? This IS a case of government becoming entangled with religion, but it is due to judicial prejudice not constitutional restriction.