v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 91 S.Ct. 2105, 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971). For a statute to withstand scrutiny under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, it first “must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion ... [and third] the statute must not foster ‘an excessive government entanglement with religion.’” Lemon, 403 U.S. at 612-13, 91 S.Ct. at 2111 (citations omitted). It is clear that both the ADEA and Title VII have a secular purpose, and that neither has the principal or primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion. See Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos, 483 U.S. 327, 335-39, 107 S.Ct. 2862, 2867-70, 97 L.Ed.2d 273 (1987) (<HOLDING>); Rayburn, 772 F.2d at 1170 n. 6 (“There is no
holding that a charitable organizations religious purposes will not remove it from the purview of a property tax exemption holding that religious exercise is any exercise of religion whether or not compelled by or central to a system of religious belief and that the use building or conversion of real property for the purpose of religious exercise shall be considered  religious exercise holding that title viis exemption for religious organizations discriminating on the basis of religion meets the lemon test recognizing a religious institutions right to free exercise of religion holding that limitations placed upon the religious activities of two prison groups found to be religious organizations were reasonable under the circumstances