Christine O'Donnell questions Constitutional separation of Church and State (politician, Michigan, status)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Excuse me! O'Donnell was right! There is no "separation of church and state" mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, or in any of our founding documents.
Where did you park your brains? Have you ever read the First Amendment? Where do you find the words, "separation of church and state"? That particular clause which has been called the "establishment clause", is addressed to Congress, and it reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ... "
It is there to protect the Church.
Time for a little study, I think, huh???.
Thank God, O'Donnell is one who understands what the Constitution says!
Good for her! I heard a transcript of that. She did well. She was right on the money!!!
Go Christine!!!
Another smart woman who will defeat these liberal idiots!
Can you find anything that says there should be separation between mosque and state? I don't think you can... so how would you feel if the 'state' promoted any religion over that of christianity?
What if your local high school decided to hold their graduation ceremonies in a local Mosque? You know, nothing religious about it, just a facility that happens to be large enough to host the event.
I have a feeling that you're ok with no wall between state and religion as long as we're talking about your religion.... or your interpretation of it.
The issue is the phrase 'Separation of Church & State' is an interpretation
many have decided covers their view, a view they want everybody to 'worship'.
That is when replacing God with Government became the plan.
Cloward and Piven
Actually, that's roughly the time right-wing religous wack-a-doodles started replacing Government with God:
Adding the word God to the pledge of allegiance, changing our national motto from "E pluribus unum" (From one, many) to "In God We Trust", adding the word God to paper money..................
One T-nut saying we need a wall like E. Germany, another T-nut saying our Constitution does not specify there is a separation between church and state, another T-nut saying the civil rights act was a mistake, another T-nut saying alcoholism and being gay are diseases ... and my personal favorite, the T-nut that believes Dearborn, Mich is operating under sharia law. You think the TPers may have a credibility problem?
The same T-nut who says alcoholism and being gay are diseases thinks the Denver bicylce rental program is evidence of a plot by the UN to take over the US government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lorrysda
I don't have my Constitution handy right at this moment, but I have looked this up time and time again when this argument comes up. The amendment reads that (paraphrased here) the Federal Government shall NOT ESTABLISH any religion...it does not indicate this so-called "separation" of church as state as is "interpreted" by people who try to use that incorrect interpretation for some nefarious purpose.
Teaching some church's version of creationism is "establishing a religion". The govt. should be neutral on this issue.
Can you find anything that says there should be separation between mosque and state? I don't think you can... so how would you feel if the 'state' promoted any religion over that of christianity?
What if your local high school decided to hold their graduation ceremonies in a local Mosque? You know, nothing religious about it, just a facility that happens to be large enough to host the event.
I have a feeling that you're ok with no wall between state and religion as long as we're talking about your religion.... or your interpretation of it.
Sounds like the high school thing is a local matter to me.
Sounds like the high school thing is a local matter to me.
I almost agree with you... but I can't. It's because when this type of thing has happened in communities where the local boards decided to have ceremonies in Christian Churches, and it wasn't until those who opposed those grounds based upon the concept of separation of church and state had to file lawsuit and then have it decided in their favor. Christians who apparently didn't agree with that concept felt strongly that their local decision should have taken precedence.
So, what kind of uproar would those same folks have if their local community did decide to have their ceremony in a Mosque? Don't you think there would be a lawsuit filed by those folks to stop it? Or, as a Christian... would you say "Well, it's a local matter and I'll attend the ceremony even though it's in a place of worship that I don't worship?" Would you go to the Mosque? Or temple? Or whatever?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
