Separation of believers?

Every once in a while there is something worthwhile to read in the MN Daily campus newspaper. I found something in yesterday's version on the topic of the First Amendment and the unconstitutional notion of separation of church and state. You can read the two articles here.

Both of them invoke the names of TJ and James Madison. The latter is the actual authority on the first amendment's intent rather than trusting in a personal opinion letter written by TJ to the Danbury Baptists where the term "separation of church and state" originates.

There really is no debate on this issue as the historical record has spoken loud and clear. The problem is that no one cares to look at history any more. I think the real crux of the issue lies in a quote made by Mr. Tabash in his editorial on the matter. He states in his criticism of religious involvement thusly,

"The evidence clearly shows the intent to form a nation in which government cannot favor believers over nonbelievers. The opposite would be horrendous. Imagine a society in which you would be a second-class citizen just because you did not subscribe to any supernatural belief system."

I must strongly state that there is no such thing as a non-believer. We are are religious in some way, shape or form. If you are a non-believer, as our society describes it, you still believe in something. A religion is an idea or belief system that one fervently follows. We are all religious. Our government was never designed to "be religious" or establish religion but there are many governmental duties and decisions that must be and are indeed based upon morality. The whole notion of a judicial system must have morality. The executive branch that enforces the laws must abide by morals and ethics. The legislative branch must, of course, also make decisions on the passage of laws that have moral effects. So the question becomes: "Which moral code reigns?" Aren't we really just replacing one belief system in this country with another? The scary thing is that the common sense of atheism and agnosticism has led this world to the unprecedented destruction of human life in the last century. Although one who is atheist can be moral, we must give credit where it is due. There is nothing good in man intrinsically. God is the source of all goodness and he already gave us a conscience and moral code to follow. It's a pretty good one too.

The church of God must continue to rise up and proclaim God's goodness and promote its permeation of the culture. I haven't met an atheist that discounts the validity of the ten commandments in everyday life any way. So what's the problem dude?