The only way I know how to do this is to plunge right on in. On another thread with a discussion about liberals & conservatives, I posted this: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindabowles/lb20010724.shtml To which Baptist Believer replied: I say it's a matter of interpretation. Perusing the web, I found this, as well: http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/legal_issues/legal_updates/other_noteworthy_cases/estab_clause.htm According to Baptist history, what is the view re: Separation of Church & State? Am I rejecting my Baptist heritage, as Baptist Believer has stated, because I embrace the establishment clause in the Constitution but do not accept the non-existant "separation of church & state clause?" My view is that the First Amendment was meant to keep government from establishing a religion, not to keep the 10 Commandments out of public buildings, kick prayer & Bible reading out of school, and all the other things the liberals and atheists are trying to twist this amendment around to mean (and have jurisprudence legislate from the bench on these issues as they have been doing for the last 40 or 50 years). So, because this is my view, have I rejected my Baptist heritage, as has been alleged? I am not wanting to debate this. Just wanting some actual Baptist history on this subject, so am bringing it to the "experts on Baptist history" in this forum.