I am writing in response to Mr. Lukens' editorial concerning the governmental funding of religious groups. Although I appreciate and respect his concerns regarding the proper separation of church and state, his argument suffers from a few serious flaws.

In actuality, the First Amendment guarantees that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." In other words, Congress is prohibited from creating an established religion via legislation. In point of fact, several state governments, most notably Massachusetts, continued to maintain and finance established churches until the 1830s.

The question of the expenditure of taxpayers' money to support programs that one feels fall outside the scope of the government's proper role is not, as Mr. Lukens implies, a future possibility; it is a present reality. Regardless of where a person might be located on the political spectrum, they are certain to oppose many of the government's investments.

Finally, Mr. Lukens' statement that "Very few Americans identify with the far right" is only true if the word "urban" is inserted between "few" and "Americans." As the 2000 election so vividly demonstrated, the nation is ideologically split between the liberal cities and the conservative country.

Just looking at Pennsylvania's county results shows that Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Cambria County went heavily for Gore, giving him the state, while rural Pennsylvania voted overwhelmingly for Bush. To say that few Americans identify with the far right begs the question, Mr. Lukens: Who did you intend to sway with your editorial?