The landmark judgment could force a Europe-wide review of the use of religious symbols in state-run schools. A panel of seven judges in Strasbourg said the display of Christian crosses, which is common but not mandatory in Italian schools, violated the principle of secular education and might be “disturbing” for children from other faiths. It upheld a complaint filed by Soile Lautsi, a Finnish woman with Italian citizenship, who complained that her children had to attend a state school in northern Italy which had crucifixes in every classroom.

and

WARSAW, Poland (AP) — Heavily Catholic Poland has joined the Vatican in criticizing a European court ruling against the display of crucifixes in Italian schools.President Lech Kaczynski said his country will never agree to remove crosses from its schools.

And my “answer” was this…..

Isn’t amazing how “all-seeing” our founding fathers were, and how that, over time, such people seem not to exist today … or at least their comprehension of historical precedent doesn’t? “State Sovereignty” (10th Amendment) was left out of the Euro Constitution. Just a minor detail … but it is a wide open door to allowing the “central government” to meddle in your “local” affairs. I would have thought an Italian might have been worried about an agnostic from Belgium meddling with local religious beliefs. But alas, nobody was watching closely enough. This was carefully placed in our Constitution so people in one state didn’t have to worship as people did in other states … the states decided. Ironic that this case is about religion … a huge arrow pointing at our own Constitution as a reminder to us of how it protects us if we (1)understand it and (2) defend it. If they ever have a new “constitutional convention” somebody should send them a copy of the Federalist Papers.

But on the other hand, we have State Sovereignty in our Constitution, yet we still cannot put up a nativity scene without out a complaint from the agnostics. (I think there should be a complaint if it is NOT present … same law, same rights). Under the false guise of separation of Church and State. So even if you have such a jewel in your Constitution, it only has value if you (1) understand the value and (2) are willing to protect it.

Last week I asked a person if they knew what the 10th amendment was … their answer was not only shocking, it was a sign of the times … “Its part of the Lord’s Prayer, isn’t it?” (And this person was allowed to vote in the last election! … and got it wrong … any wonder?).

I agree with much of what you say about states rights. However…let’s talk about schools and roads for a minutes.

If you are a school and you accept federal money, I believe the feds have the right to add strings. You don’t want the strings, don’t take the money.

Same for cell phones on interstate highways – you don’t like the rules, don’t take the cash.

When states decide that they’re tired of dealing with federal mandates that exist only because they’re accepting the money, then they can do whatever they wish.