People often falsely  accuse atheists of wanting to force religion out of existence via force of government.

The Fort Worth transit authority decided to change it's bus add policies after the competing adds of churches and atheist groups run out at the end of the year. They will no longer accept any religious adds due to the controversy they say it creates and distracts from the employees doing their jobs.

The founders concept of neutrality was much like giving a child a choice. "You can do your homework now, or you can do it later, but you will do it"

Much in the same vein "You let it all in, or you keep it all out, but you will not exclude or include based on favoritism of one label over another"

The truth is that the transit probably would have, if it could have, allowed church adds but not atheist adds, but feared a lawsuit if they didn't allow them. And when the shit hit the fan when the atheist add went up, the transit company took the "If I cant have you no one can", which is where theists end up once they realize they have to either share or abstain.

It is a very important anti-monopoly concept that the founders were very wise in implementing and as much as they want to point the fingers at us evil kitten barbecuing atheists, they fail to understand that this concept of neutrality protects them as well.

What if this same transit company only allowed Catholic adds, but not Baptist adds. What if this company allowed Jewish adds, but not Christian adds? What if this company was in Utah and only allowed LDS adds but not Catholic adds?

No atheist I know thought this would last, but it did force government to take the Constitutional position by giving the company a choice, "let it all in, or keep it all out" and the policy makers of the company, most likely Christian, weren't doing it because of a controversy, but because they didn't want to share the same venue with atheists.

You have to treat them like children with toys, you either share it, or have it taken away.

But either way believers will not get away with monopolizing ANY government funded venue and then deny that same venue to others. If they don't want others doing it, then they shouldn't be doing it themselves.

The founders concept worked in this case and what gets me is that most Christians don't even know how much the founders were wise and how much it protects them as well.

The concept of Neutrality is not  a ban, but showing no favoritism. Once they put up their church adds they cannot complain when others use that same venue, otherwise don't bitch.