+21

Continuing from the preceding post:

In other words, the issue is different with that city than it is with the Congress chaplain example because even if the government of that city is certain that taking votes of all persons with right to vote in that city would approve the display of those establishments of religion, and assuming that would be representing the want for the whole city like how such process represent the want for Congress, unless this representation materialize and chooses those Christmas displays, the action of the government in making those displays would still be respecting those establishments of religion of those religious displays because it depends on the connection of those establishments to the people, in its decision to show those displays (This got to be the longest written sentence in history).
On the other hand, if for example, it is known that there is usually a traffic congestion on Christmas day and the government want to make that day a holiday because of that, or simply the government thinks that there is enough probability that there would be enough of missing work on that day because of being late to justify benefiting from counting it as one of the holidays it gives, then doing that wouldn't be respecting an establishment of religion even though there is a dependence on the connection of Christmas to people in recognizing the fact or probability that is the reason. The difference from the above situation is that the government in this is not doing something that is honoring or emphasizing the significance of a religious establishment (like a Nativity Scene or a Christmas Tree) and therefore needs the respect involved in doing that to be a pass through to another reason. Here, in the traffic congestion example for example, what the government interfacing is simply that traffic congestion or the probability for it to occur.