Jerusalem Questioned as the Rightful Capital of Israel!

View this Message in a Browser | Subscription Preferences | Unsubscribe

	Over 3,000 years ago, Jerusalem was recognized as the capital of the Jewish people. Yet today, the United States government, in defiance of a law passed in 1995, refuses to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the nation of Israel. Every other nation in the world is allowed to designate their own capital…except for the Jewish state. Stand with us, the Jerusalem Prayer Team, as we launch the Jerusalem DC (David’s Capital) Campaign to call on the American people to recognize Jerusalem - the entire, undivided Holy City - as the capital of Israel, and to do so publically.

Read about Salem Web Network | Subscription Preferences | Unsubscribe

© 2012 Salem Web Network. All rights reserved. 111 Virginia Street, Suite 500, Richmond, VA 23219.

http://www.jerusalemprayerteam.org/

http://www.salemoffers.com/campaign/petition/rc/swnemail

Over 3,000 years ago, Jerusalem was recognized as the capital of the Jewish people. Yet today, the United States government, in defiance of a law passed in 1995, refuses to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the nation of Israel. Every other nation in the world is allowed to designate their own capital...except for the Jewish state.
Stand with us, the Jerusalem Prayer Team, as we launch the Jerusalem DC (David's Capital) Campaign to call on the American people to recognize Jerusalem - the entire, undivided Holy City - as the capital of Israel, and to do so publicly.

I am a God-fearing American, and I am publicly and officially recognizing Jerusalem -- the entire, undivided Holy City -- as the capital of Israel. This position has been a settled matter of US law since 1995, yet our government continues to refuse to follow the parameters of the Jerusalem Embassy Act.
Even more importantly, the status of Jerusalem as Israel's capital is settled by Almighty God. Thousands of years before there was a Washington DC, there was Jerusalem DC -- David's Capital. Before there was a United Nations trying to determine Jerusalem's status, there were pagan nations that attempted to conquer and destroy the Holy City.
Scripture teaches that every nation and empire that stretched its hand against Jerusalem has crumbed to dust. God set His name in Jerusalem for the Jewish people, and that can never be revoked or changed.
While there are many complex issues to be resolved in the Middle East, the status of Jerusalem is not subject to negotiation. I declare my support and recognition of Jerusalem as the undivided and eternal capital of Israel. I pledge to pray for Israel and leaders of this country as they carry out the responsibilities of the office in which God has placed them. May we be obedient to God's unchanging Word.

Gideon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For other uses, see Gideon (disambiguation).

Judges in the Bible
In the Book of Joshua
Joshua
In the Book of Judges
Othniel Ehud Shamgar Deborah Barak† Gideon Abimelech† Tola Jair Jephthah Ibzan Elon Abdon Samson
In First Samuel
Eli Samuel
†Not explicitly described as a judge
v   t   e

Gideon or Gedeon ( /ˈɡɪd.iː.ən/^[1]; Hebrew: גִּדְעוֹן, Modern Gid'on Tiberian Giḏʻôn), which means "Destroyer," "Mighty warrior," or "Feller (of trees)" was a judge of the Hebrews. His story is recorded in chapters 6 to 8 of the Book of Judges in the Hebrew Bible.Judges 6–8. He is also named in chapter 11 of the Epistle to the Hebrews as an example of a man of faith.

Contents   [hide]  1 Family 2 Biblical Narrative 3 Christian Orthodox and Catholic interpretation 4 References

[edit]Family

Gideon is the son of Joash, from the Abiezrite clan in the tribe of Manasseh.

[edit]Biblical Narrative

"Gideon thanks God for the miracle of the dew", painting by Maarten van Heemskerck(Musée des Beaux-Arts de Strasbourg)

As is the pattern throughout the book of Judges, the Israelites again turned away from God after 40 years of peace brought byDeborah's victory over Canaan and were allowed to be oppressed by the neighboring Midianites and Amalekites. God chose Gideon, a young man from the tribe of Manasseh, to free the people of Israel and to condemn their worship of idols.

Very unsure of both himself and God's command, he requested proof of God's will by three miracles: firstly a sign from an angel in Judges 6:16ff, and then two signs involving a fleece, performed on consecutive nights and the exact opposite of each other:

36 Then Gideon said to God, “If You will deliver Israel through me, as You have spoken, 37 behold, I will put a fleece of wool on the threshing floor. If there is dew on the fleece only, and it is dry on all the ground, then I will know that You will deliver Israel through me, as You have spoken.” 38 And it was so. When he arose early the next morning and squeezed the fleece, he drained the dew from the fleece, a bowl full of water. 39 Then Gideon said to God, “Do not let Your anger burn against me that I may speak once more; please let me make a test once more with the fleece, let it now be dry only on the fleece, and let there be dew on all the ground.” 40 God did so that night; for it was dry only on the fleece, and dew was on all the ground.(Judges 6:36–40, New American Standard Bible)

On God's instruction, Gideon destroyed the town's altar to the foreign god Baal and the symbol of the goddess Asherah beside it. He went on to send out messengers to gather together men from the tribes of Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali, as well as his own tribe Manasseh in order to meet an armed force of the people of Midian and the Amalek that had crossed the Jordan River and were encamped in the Valley of Jezreel.

However, God informed Gideon that the men he had gathered were too many – with so many men, there would be reason for the Israelites to claim the victory as their own instead of acknowledging that God had saved them. God first instructed Gideon to send home those men who were afraid. Gideon then allowed any man who wanted to leave, to leave; 22,000 men returned home and 10,000 remained. Yet the number was still too many, according to God:

⁴But the Lord said to Gideon, "There are still too many men. Take them down to the water, and I will sift them for you there. If I say, 'This one shall go with you, he shall go; but if I say, this one shall not go with you, he shall not go." ⁵ So Gideon took the men down to the water. There the Lord told him, "Separate those who lap the water with their tongues like a dog from those who kneel down to drink." ⁶Three hundred men lapped with their hands to their mouths. All the rest got down on their knees to drink. ⁷ The Lord said to Gideon, "With the 300 men that lapped I will save you and give the Midianites into your hands. Let all the other men go, each to his own place.(Judges 7:4–7, NIV Bible)

During the night God instructed Gideon to approach the Midianite camp. Gideon overheard a Midianite man tell a friend of a dream in which God had given the Midianites over to Gideon. Gideon worshiped God for His encouragement and revelation. Gideon returned to the Israelite camp and gave each of his men a trumpet (shofar)^[2] and a clay jar with a torch hidden inside. Divided into three companies, Gideon and the three hundred marched on the enemy camp.

¹⁷"Watch me," he told them. "Follow my lead. When I get to the edge of the camp, do exactly as I do. ¹⁸When I and all who are with me blow our trumpets, then from all around the camp blow yours and shout, 'For the Lord and for Gideon.' " .... ²⁰The three companies blew the trumpets and smashed the jars. Grasping the torches in their left hands and holding in their right hands the trumpets they were to blow, they shouted, "A sword for the Lord and Gideon!" ²¹While each man held his position around the camp, all the Midianites ran, crying out as they fled. ²²When the three hundred trumpets sounded, the Lord caused the men throughout the camp to turn on each other with their swords. (Judges 7:17–22, NIV Bible)

Gideon's fleece, as symbol of Mary, in a "Hunt of the UnicornAnnunciation" (ca. 1500) from a Netherlandish book of hours. For the complicated iconography, seeHortus Conclusus.

Gideon sent messengers ahead into Israel calling for the Ephriamites to pursue the retreating Midianites and two of their leaders, Oreb and Zeeb. Gideon and the three hundred pursued Zebah and Zalmunna, the two Midianite kings. When he had asked for assistance in his pursuit, the men of Succoth and Peniel refused and taunted Gideon. After capturing the two kings, Gideon punished the men of Succoth, and pulled down the tower of Peniel killing all the men there. Finally, Gideon himself killed Zebah and Zalmunna as justice for the death of his brothers.

The Israelites pleaded with Gideon to be their king, but he refused, telling them that only God was their ruler. Interestingly, however, he carries on to make an "ephod" out of the gold won in battle, which causes the whole of Israel again to turn away from God. Gideon had 70 sons from the many women he takes as wives. He also had a concubine who bore him a son that he named Abimelech (which means "my father is king"). There was peace in Israel for forty years during the life of Gideon. As soon as Gideon dies of old age, the Israelites again turn to worship the false god Baal-Berith and ignore the family of Gideon.

[edit]Christian Orthodox and Catholic interpretation

In both Eastern Orthodoxy and Western Christianity, Gideon's fleece was regarded as a type of the Annunciation to Mary, where Mary was the fleece, and Christ the dew.^{[citation needed]} He is regarded as a saint by the Eastern Orthodox/Eastern Catholic Churches as well as the Roman Catholic Church, who hold his feast day on September 26 (those churches which follow the traditional Julian Calendar, September 26 currently falls on October 9 of the modern Gregorian Calendar). He is listed in the 2004 edition of the "Roman Martyrology" as (2) on September 26. He is also commemorated, together with the other righteous figures of the Old Testament on the Sunday of the Holy Fathers (the Sunday beforeChristmas). He is commemorated as one of the Holy Forefathers in the Calendar of Saints of the Armenian Apostolic Church on July 30.

Gideon of Manasseh Clan of Abieezer Cadet branch of the Tribe of Manasseh
Preceded by Deborah	Judge of Israel	Succeeded by Abimelech

[edit]References

1. ^ LDS.org: "Book of Mormon Pronunciation Guide" (retrieved 2012-02-25), IPA-ified from «gĭd´ē-un»
2. ^ An interesting theory about the significance of the shofar is advanced in Chapter 3-1 of Hearing Shofar: The Still Small Voice of the Ram's Horn. The author, Michael Chusid, hypothesizes that most of Gideon's troops owned their own shofar and used them as drinking vessels similar to rhyton. The three hundred that had to kneel were so poorly equipped they did not even own a shofar. This underscores that God wanted Gideon to have a weak force so it would be impossible to claim that their victory was by force of arms and not by divine intervention.

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2008)

Separation of Church and State – In the Constitution

Separation of Church and State – In the Constitution
An honored principle of American law is the “separation of church and state.” Americans differ sharply as to what the country’s founding fathers intended when this principle was incorporated into American law and what the principle should mean in practice today. These disputes stem from differing views about fundamental truth and the importance of belief.

The words “separation of church and state” are not expressly in the U.S. Constitution. Instead, there are just three references to the relationship between religion and government in the Constitution. The first, in Article VI, section 3, says that no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to hold public office. The second two constitutional references to religion are found in the First Amendment. The first, known as the Establishment Clause, provides that the government shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion. The second, known as the Free Exercise Clause, provides that the government shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.
Separation of Church and State – An Interpretation of the First Amendment
The well-known phrase, “wall of separation between church and state,” is actually a reference to a phrase used by President Thomas Jefferson to describe the function of the First Amendment in a letter in 1802. The phrase did not become part of U.S. jurisprudence until more than 75 years later when the U.S. Supreme Court stated that it was an “almost” authoritative explanation of the First Amendment (but then nevertheless interfered with a Mormon’s free exercise of his religion since it included polygamy). Since 1947, the courts have frequently used the phrase in deciding First Amendment cases.

At minimum, the separation of church and state means that the U.S. is not a theocracy, as is the case in some Middle Eastern countries. Americans do not believe that the country’s leader rules by divine right or has divine powers. It also means that the church and the government are separate institutions and neither directs the internal affairs of the other. The government is not involved in choosing church leaders and these leaders do not serve in government in their role as church leaders (although they may be elected or appointed to government positions in their capacity as ordinary citizens), as is true in England. In addition, in 1947 with the case of Everson v. Board of Education, the U.S. Supreme Court began to hold that the separation of church and state means that there should be virtually no contact between religious ideas and government activity.
Separation of Church and State – The Controversy Today
While the Supreme Court’s current position on the separation of church and state protects those of minority faiths or no faith, it often leaves those of majority faiths feeling that their free exercise of religion is being infringed. It is also deeply troubling to those who believe that faith is necessary, or at least conducive, to moral and lawful living. The Court’s position has also become increasingly controversial as the role of government has expanded through the years. Because the government is involved in many aspects of community life today, from maintaining the public school system to administering many social benefits, preserving a strict wall between state and any religious idea pushes religion to the margins of public life. Many Americans believe this is a result the Country’s founding fathers never intended.
Separation of Church and State – Differing Interpretations
There are two main schools of thought as to how the courts should interpret the minimal references to religion in the Constitution and applythem today.

• Original understanding or intent. Some Americans believe the courts should make every attempt to discern what the original drafters of the Constitution and First Amendment intended at the time of drafting and apply this intent to today’s circumstances. They argue that this is the law of the land enacted by the people through legal procedure and can be altered only by Constitutional amendment. This view tends to favor a greater level of government accommodation toward religion since it is undisputed that government at the time the Constitution and First Amendment were adopted both recognized and respected religious belief and made many allowances for the religious nature of Americans, including public prayer and Bible reading.
• Moral understanding or intent. Others argue that the Constitution reflects certain principles of general morality which courts must translate as best as possible into current reality, adapting as necessary.

Separation of Church and State – What Is the Goal?
Americans also differ as to what the goal of the First Amendment really is. Is it to ensure complete noninvolvement of the state in church affairs and vice versa? Is it to ensure neutrality of the government toward those of various religious beliefs or no belief at all, thus ensuring equal rights for all? Or is the primary goal of the First Amendment to secure religious liberty, ensuring that all Americans have free choice in what they believe and the freedom to express or not express those beliefs?

Separation of Church and State -- The Cases
The following principles have emerged from the cases in which the Court has hashed out the parameters of the separation between church and state for past 60 years:

• The government must remain neutral, neither favoring or opposing religion or non-religion. For example, the government must be content-neutral when issuing permits for groups to use public property for meetings, neither favoring non-religious groups over religious groups nor favoring one denomination over another. Public schools must be neutral when allowing extracurricular groups to use the school property for meetings and may not favor non-religious groups over religious groups or vice versa.
• The government may not sponsor, endorse or appear to sponsor or endorse religion. For example, the public school system cannot write or require the recitation of prayers. Religious messages and symbols may only be displayed on public property where it is clear that they are not a government endorsement of a particular religion because they have a secular purpose or are clearly private speech by individuals or non-government groups.
• The government may not encourage religious practice in a way that is coercive as could be the case where a religious observance is declared to be voluntary but circumstances make an individual’s non-participation undesirable or unlikely, such as prayer at a public school graduation ceremony.
• The government may not interfere with a person’s religious ideas, but it may interfere with his actions. For example, the government may prohibit drug use although an individual maintains drug use is necessary to his religious practice.
• The government should attempt to accommodate religious belief, such as releasing children from public school for off-campus religious instruction, but is not required to change widespread government procedure which applies neutrally to the general public to accommodate individual religious belief. For example, the Court held that the government need not change the Social Security system to accommodate an individual’s religious objection to being assigned a Social Security number.
• The government does not violate the Constitution when it enacts broadly applicable benefit programs for a valid secular purpose although religious groups may ultimately benefit from the program. For example, the Court has upheld school voucher programs where enacted to provide educational assistance in a failing public school system although many parents chose to use the vouchers to send their children to religious schools.

Separation of Church and State – The Common Misunderstanding
Today many Americans misunderstand the words “separation of church and state,” assuming that the law requires that public life must have nothing whatsoever to do with religion. They mistakenly believe that they should not discuss their own religious beliefs in public forums or even acknowledge their own religious traditions or heritage. This is an overreaction as well as a misinterpretation of the law for two reasons.

• The concept of “separation of church and state” applies to the actions of the government only. It does not apply to private groups or individuals. Individuals and non-government groups are free to practice their religion, have religious discussions and display religious symbols at any time, even when on public property. In fact, these are constitutionally protected rights. For example, school children may openly participate in prayer and religious study groups during non-instructional time in the public schools. They may reference their personal beliefs in school assignments. Citizens may pray on the courthouse steps or display Bible verses on placards.
• The government is required to remain neutral toward religion, nothostile toward religion. The Supreme Court has emphatically stated that the government, including the public school system, should not “show a callous indifference to religious groups. That would be preferring those who believe in no religion over those who do believe.” In addition, the government must remain neutral as between religions. Government officials, including teachers, must be careful to avoid violating the law by denying religion the same respect accorded other philosophical viewpoints or private activities or allowing one religion preference over another, for example, allowing Jewish symbols to be displayed while denying Christians and Muslims the right to display objects relating to their faith.

Separation of Church and State Thomas Jefferson and the First Amendment

Today, many Americans think that the First Amendment says "Separation of Church and State." The Courts and the media will often refer to a ruling as being in violation of the "Separation of Church and State." A recent national poll showed that 69% of Americans believe that the First Amendment says "Separation of Church and State." You may be surprised to learn that these words do not appear in the First Amendment or anywhere else in the Constitution!¹  Here is what theFirst Amendment actually does say.

The First Amendment :

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So where did the words "Separation of Church and State." come from? They can be traced back to a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote back in 1802. In October 1801, the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut wrote to President Jefferson, and in their letter they voiced some concerns about Religious Freedom. On January 1, 1802 Jefferson wrote a letter to them in which he added the phrase "Separation of Church and State." When you read the full letter, you will understand that Jefferson was simply underscoring the First Amendment as a guardian of the peoples religious freedom from government interference. Here is an excerpt from Jefferson's letter. . .

"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State." Read the full text of Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association..

Jefferson simply quotes the First Amendment then uses a metaphor, the "wall", to separate the government from interfering with religious practice. Notice that the First Amendment puts Restrictions only on the Government, not the People! The Warren Court re-interpreted the First Amendment thus putting the restrictions on the People! Today the government can stop you from Praying in school, reading the Bible in school, showing the Ten Commandments in school, or have religious displays at Christmas. This is quite different from the wall Jefferson envisioned, protecting the people from government interference with Religious practice.

When Thomas Jefferson wrote his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association he never intended the words "Separation of Church and State" to be taken out of context and used as a substitute for the First Amendment, but for all practical purposes is what the courts have done.

If actions speak stronger then words, it is interesting to note that 3 days after Jefferson wrote those words, he attended church in the largest congregation in North America at the time. This church held its weekly worship services on government property, in the House Chambers of the U.S. Capital Building. The wall of separation applies everywhere in the country even on government property , without government interference. This is how it is written in the Constitution, this is how Thomas Jefferson understood it from his letter and actions, and this is how the men who wrote the Constitution practiced it.
"The metaphor of a wall of separation is bad history and worse law. It has made a positive chaos out of court rulings. It should be explicitly abandoned."Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court,William Rehnquist

Also notice that there are two parts to the First Amendment that refer to religion: the establishment clause² and the free exercise clause³. Today much is said about the establishment clause but there is very little mention of the free exercise clause.

While the words "Separation of Church and State" do not appear in the U.S.A. Constitution, they do appear in the constitution of the former U.S.S.R. Communist State.
At the very heart of Jefferson's idea "Wall of Separation",  is the notion that the government will not interfere with people's right to worship God.  The very fact that the government has ruled to regulate religious practices, indicates that the government has crossed that "Wall of Separation."  

Separation of Church and State: A First Amendment Primer

Separation: Good for Government,
Good for Religion

---

The right to freedom of religion is so central to American democracy that it was enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution along with other fundamental rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of the press. 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."       -- The First Amendment

In order to guarantee an atmosphere of absolute religious liberty, this country's founders also mandated the strict separation of church and state. Largely because of this prohibition against government regulation or endorsement of religion, diverse faiths have flourished and thrived in America since the founding of the republic. Indeed, James Madison, the father of the United States Constitution, once observed that "the [religious] devotion of the people has been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the state."

Americans are still among the most religious people in the world. Yet the government plays almost no role in promoting, endorsing or funding religious institutions or religious beliefs. Free from government control -- and withoutgovernment assistance -- religious values, literature, traditions and holidays permeate the lives of our citizens and, in their diverse ways, form an integral part of our national culture. By maintaining the wall separating church and state, we can guarantee the continued vitality of religion in American life.

Violations of the Separation of Church and State

---

Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black best expressed the purpose and function of the Establishment Clause when he said that it rests "on the belief that a union of government and religion tends to destroy government and degrade religion." Some Americans reject this dictum, promoting the idea that the government should endorse the religious values of certain members of the community to the exclusion of others. In fact, such violations of the separation of church and state take place with disturbing frequency in American government, at local, state and Federal levels. Recent incidents include the following:

• An Alabama judge regularly opens his court sessions with a Christian prayer. Further, he has refused to remove a plaque containing the Ten Commandments from his courtroom wall. Alabama Governor Fob James has threatened to call in the Alabama National Guard to prevent the plaque's removal.
• Local municipalities have erected nativity scenes, crosses, menorahs and other religious symbols to the exclusion of those of other faiths.
• The Board of Aldermen of a Connecticut city has opened its sessions with a prayer that beseeches citizens to "elect Christian men and women to office so that those who serve will be accountable . . . to the teachings of Jesus Christ . . . ."
• A variety of religious groups are demanding that their faith-based social service programs receive public funding although these programs engage in aggressive proselytizing and religious indoctrination.
• On the "National Day of Prayer," local authorities acting in their official capacities have led citizens in sectarian prayer.

Public Schools: Teaching Democracy, Not Dogma

---

Public schools play a central role in American life. They mold children into good citizens by teaching the core values of pluralistic democracy: freedom and tolerance. Our public schools must therefore be hospitable to students of all faiths and no faith. Public schools should teach an understanding of and respect for diversity, as well as a spirit of acceptance and inclusion. They should also help develop citizens who respect our nation's legacy of religious freedom and the separation of church and state.

Public school teachers rightly function as important authority figures in the lives of their students. But, under the Constitution, their authority may not extend to matters of religious belief. According to the Supreme Court, the First Amendment requires that public school students never be given the impression that their school officially sanctions religion in general or prefers a specific faith in particular. Further, students must never feel coerced by peer or public pressure into adhering to the dictates of any religion.

Contrary to the claims of opponents of church-state separation, public school students enjoy very broad rights to act in accordance with their religious values and to practice their religious beliefs while at school. From words of grace whispered quietly before a meal in a cafeteria to prayer groups gathering before school at the flagpole, every day all over the country, students engage in constitutionally protected religious expression on public school grounds.

Despite the Supreme Court's clear rules against school sponsorship of religious activity and endorsement of religion, the religious right and others opposed to the separation of church and state have repeatedly attempted to inject sectarianism into the schools. For example, they have consistently sought laws mandating a moment of silence and the teaching of the biblicalaccount of creation as an alternative to science. Imposition of an organized moment of silence is almost always unconstitutional since both the purpose and effect of a moment of silence are plainly to advance religion. Further, the Supreme Court has held that it is unconstitutional to require science teachers to teach creationism or to forbid them from teaching evolution.

Violations of Church-State Separation in Our Public Schools

---

Blatant violations of church-state separation continue to take place in our public schools.  Among the more recent such violations have been the following:

• In Alabama, a family of Jewish children was repeatedly harassed after complaining about the promotion of Christian beliefs in their public schools. One of the students was forced to write an essay on "Why Jesus Loves Me." At a mandatory school assembly, a Christian minister condemned to hell all people who did not believe in Jesus Christ.
• Elsewhere in Alabama, officials in the DeKalb County school system blatantly disobeyed a district court ruling that forbade religious activity in school such as the broadcast of Christian prayers over the school public address system and the distribution of Gideon Bibles on school property. The court has now been forced to issue an injunction to compel the schools to abide by its earlier ruling.
• A Jewish student at a public school in Utah was required to sing religious songs and participate in Mormon religious worship activities as part of a choir class. After she voiced objections to these practices, the student was humiliated in class by the teacher and became the target of anti-Semitic harassment by her classmates.
• Some otherwise well-intentioned advocates for school reform are promoting initiatives that would channel public funds to schools that engage in religious indoctrination. In their various forms -- "vouchers," "school choice," "hope and opportunity scholarships" -- these programs would force Americans to do something contrary to our very notion of democracy: to pay taxes to support the propagation of religious dogma.

What You Can Do

---

The best way for citizens to protect their constitutional right to be free from religious coercion is to become educated, and to educate others, about the separation of church and state. Local officials need to understand that they may not use their authority, government funds or government property to promote religion, even if the majority in the community approves. School administrators and teachers need to understand that public schools should teach the ideals of American democracy, not religious pedagogy.

If you are concerned that a violation of the separation of church and state is taking place in your community, or if you have questions regarding the Establishment Clause, you may contact your local ADL Regional Office.