Actually the key thinkers among the Founding Fathers were freemasons and mystics; certainly not Christians in the sense that the writer quoted above wishes to imply. For one thing, Jefferson in particular as the paradigmatic example absolutely rejected any effort to enforce thought in an authoritarian manner.

The Constitution states plainly that :

Amendment I

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.

---

Other interesting principles established by the same document are:

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

---

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Just in case anyone is not familiar with the actual texts.

As for compelling the recitation of assertions of DIvinity by children, it may be argued they are not "people" yet (which would tie a knot in the tail of the Anti Abortion crowd), but if they are considered people then a simple issue remains: what part of "no law" don't you understand? This has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism. It has to do with the fundametal boundaries of civil decency encoded in the Bill of Rights. (I understand it is only 'compelled' tacitly, not explicitly, and not by law. So it's only covertly illegal, I guess; but the law defining the Pledge is highly problematical in this context).)

I'd like to see how much smoke and noise would get stirred up if some partisan bunch tried to change the Amendment itself! If you think this is a storm in a teacup!!

A