Of course you can't prove it gives preferential treatment.
What it does do is gives implicit endorsement of a certain religious belief. Maybe not to you. But to some it does.
If he had it in his private chamber, I wouldn't have a problem with it.
Regardless of what all these so called scholars think, this is what the founding fathers meant when they wrote that ammendment. That being a certain religion would not get you treated more fairly than another. Its not all that complicated.
I personally view the "separation" that Jefferson spoke of meant that religion has no business in government, and government has no business in religion. (That's not to say my interpretation is better...just different.)
This doesn't mean that government should stay out of whether the block should be in the courthouse or not. It means the block should never have been there in the first place.
(I must say I do find it ironic (and amusing) that you are an atheist arguing it doesn't matter if it's there, and I, as a Catholic (and thereby a Christian - though not by Off2's standards), am saying it shouldn't be there. 
)
_________________________
"Nature has constituted utility to man the standard and test of virtue. Men living in different countries, under different circumstances, different habits and regimens, may have different utilities; the same act, therefore, may be useful and consequently virtuous in one country which is injurious and vicious in another differently circumstanced" - Thomas Jefferson, moral relativist
Previous Topic
Index
