corrente

Via The Hill, an announcement from that old constitutional amendment freak Ernest Istook (R-Okla)--who is still pissed that he can't get a flag-burning amendment passed, wants a constitutional amendment for school prayer, and wants to forbid federal funds for schools do not permit prayer. As soon as the Supreme Court hands down its decision on the public display of Roy Moore's Ten Commandments, possibly by next week, Istook, with the help of 45 co-sponsors, is ramming through a proposal for an amendment to "protect religious expression in schools and on other public property".

"Istook’s amendment, the “Pledge and Prayer Amendment,” could be the next chapter in an ongoing battle over the propriety of religious expression on government-owned property."

According to Istook's office:

"The Pledge and Prayer Amendment “would allow the display of the Ten Commandments and other historical religious documents on public property,” “allow greater freedom for students who wish to pray” and “allow students to recite the entire Pledge of Allegiance” — including the line “one nation, under God” — according to bullet points put out by Istook’s office."

This is Istook's second try, after an unsuccessful push to pass something along the same lines in 1998, and failing to get a 2/3rds majority (ah, those halcyon days!)

What do you want to bet that his definition of "other historical religious documents" won't be including Tibetan prayer flags and the Rig Veda?

UPDATE: And this is what happens when a non-Christian wants to inject "other historical religious documents" into the public space. (Thanks to Kevin from PA For Democracy for the tip.)