Re "A Godless Capitol center," Editorial, July 25
If The Times agrees that "state-mandated religious invocations don't belong in a secular, multicultural democracy," then why not take the next reasonable step and advocate that religious invocations, declarations or allusions be constricted to private expressions?
Religion has huge liabilities built into its structure that are best left to the ancient and now irrelevant superstitions of its origins.
I shouldn't have to see my tax dollars used to support it.
Your otherwise reasonable editorial oversimplifies the issue, portraying it merely as a battle between religious lobbyists and atheists.
What's really at stake here is the separation of church and state, set forth in our Constitution.
Simply, the state has no business promoting one religious view over another, or even any religious view at all.