<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
Kai et. al.<BR>
<BR>
Why are you dodging the specific example in question regarding separation of church and state?<BR>
<BR>
The specific example in discussion, which inspired this discussion on Vision2020 of the separation of church and state, was the Kibbie Dome being rented to allow Moscow Idaho's Christ Church worship services.<BR>
<BR>
I pointed out that this example demonstrates how publicly funded property can be used to allow some kinds of religious expression and not others, when I pointed out that the Kibbie Dome and the U of I would almost certainly not allow the Aryan Nations Church to hold worship services in the Kibbie Dome. <BR>
<BR>
Do you dispute this claim that the U of I and the Kibbie Dome would not rent to allow the Aryan Nations Church to hold worship services in the Kibbie Dome?<BR>
<BR>
The question is, if the government allows certain religions to use public property and not others, does this not present the problem of the appearance of or the reality of government showing a bias toward one religion over another? And thus is not the solution for the government to not get involved in allowing religious use in some examples of the use of public property?<BR>
<BR>
Let's look at this problem from a different angle, viewed from how Boise handled the separation of church and state principle in a city park, which exactly supports my position.<BR>
<BR>
Read at this web link about Boise's decision to remove the Ten Commandments from a city park.<BR>
<BR>
<A HREF="http://www.cityofboise.org/mayor/news_releases/index.aspx?id=monument_move">http://www.cityofboise.org/mayor/news_releases/index.aspx?id=monument_move</A><BR>
<BR>
Boise removed the Ten Commandments monument from Julia Davis park because, if I understand correctly, they were faced with allowing every kind of monument relating to every kind of religious faith if they did not, including allowing an anti-gay monument that a Kansas preacher wanted to place in that same Boise City park. <BR>
<BR>
A monument in the city park with quotes from the Bible about stoning gays?<BR>
<BR>
Would you support such a monument, Kai? Because if you really think the government should allow all forms of religious expression on all public property without discrimination, I think you would be forced to support the placement of a monument in the city park with quotes from the Bible about stoning gays.<BR>
<BR>
I'm eagerly awaiting your answer.<BR>
<BR>
Ted Moffett<BR>
<BR>
>From the link above regarding Boise's decision to remove the Ten Commandments monument from Julia Davis park:<BR>
<BR>
"The proposed edifice would bear the name of Matthew Shepard, a 21-year-old Wyoming college student who died in 1998 after he was kidnapped by two men and beaten into a coma. Police said Shepard was targeted in part because he was gay, and his two attackers were later convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison. Phelps's monument would say Shepard went to hell because he was gay."<BR>
</FONT></HTML>