As was previously stated, the Federal Government’s purpose for the first amendment was not to inhibit religious displays or practices, but to limit ITSELF from interfering with the “free exercise thereof”. In other words, the limitation was NOT imposed upon religion (whether it be on government property or elsewhere). Quite the contrary...the limitation was placed upon government.

Justice Joseph Story (Supreme Court Justice and Founder of Harvard Law School) stated: “We are not to attribute this (First Amendment) prohibition of a national religious establishment to an indifference to religion in general, and especially to CHRISTIANITY (which none could hold in more reverence, than the FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION) …. Probably, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and of the Amendment to it now under consideration, the general, if not the universal sentiment in America was that CHRISTIANITY ought to receive ENCOURAGEMENT FROM THE STATE … An attempt to level all religions and make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference would have created universal disapprobation (disapproval) if not universal indignation (anger).” #51 (emphasis added)

The House Judiciary Committee in 1853-54, asserted that “Had the people, during the revolution, had a suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity, that Revolution would have been strangled in its cradle. At the time of the adoptions of the Constitution and the amendments, the universal sentiment was that CHRISTIANITY SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED, not any one sect (denomination). Any attempt to level and discard all religion would have been viewed with universal indignation. IT (RELIGION) MUST BE CONSIDERED AS THE FOUNDATION ON WHICH THE WHOLE STRUCTURE RESTS. … In this age there can be no substitute for Christianity; that, in its general principles, is the great conservative element on which we must rely for the purity and permanence of free institutions. That was the religion of the founders of the republic, AND THEY EXPECTED IT TO REMAIN THE RELIGION OF THEIR DESCENDENTS.” #52 (emphasis added)

The Senate Judiciary Committee (1853-54) put it this way: “They, (the founders) intended, by this Amendment, to prohibit “an establishment of religion” such as the English Church presented, or any thing like it. But they had no fear or jealousy of religion itself, nor did they wish to see us an irreligious people …THEY DID NOT INTEND TO SPREAD OVER ALL THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES AND THE WHOLE PUBLIC ACTION OF THE NATION THE DEAD AND REVOLTING SPECTABLE OF ATHEISTICAL APATHY.” #53 (emphasis added)

Our forefathers high regard for Christianity in the public square was understood. The thought of removing it to make government “neutral” was unthinkable. Dr. Benjamin Rush (educator, signer of the Declaration of Independence) put it this way:

“Such is my veneration for every religion that reveals the attributes of the Deity, or a future state of REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS, that I had rather see the opinions of Confucius or Mohamed inculcated upon our youth than see them grow up wholly devoid of a system of religious principles. But the religion I mean to recommend in this place is that of the NEW TESTAMENT …. (A)ll its doctrines and precepts are calculated to promote the happiness of society and the safety and well being of civil government.” #54