“Our Forefathers put separation of Church and State into our Constitution to protect us.”

Really Ray? Could you show us all where, because I cant find it in my copy or any on line version.

Great letter. The Goldwater and Rove crowd have learned how to win elections through manipulation. The Evangelicals are being used and I hope they wake up to that fact soon.

Sis Boom Bah-

Try the First Amendment .

Perhaps you just had a bad copy of the constitution and they forgot to attach the Bill of Rights, but it’s OK, the founders didn’t.

I would suggest that the “establishment clause” in the First Amendment is actually there more to protect the CHURCH than it is to protect the STATE.

Note that one of the first acts of the Nazi party in Germany was to create the Reichkirk, and the office of Reich Bishop, whose job it was to insure that proper Nazi doctrine was taught in all the churches. One of the first demands was that the Nazi flag be displayed prominently in the church. A group of German and Swiss religious leaders protested, met together to stand up against Nazi power in the church, and gave their lives for it.

Consider THAT, whenever you hear the phrase “Christian Nation”.

Ok Chas, here is the text of the first amendment;
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Of those words, can you point out to us anything at all about a separation of anything? The word, or any form of the word, simply isnt there.

Sorry, but there is no such clause in the Constitution. The Teacher’s Union has taught Ray well. He spews forth the Socialist message as if it were true.

Thanks for this. If you’re Catholic, you are purposely sinning if you vote for the Socialist. http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/10/01/vatican-official-attacks-us-democrats-as-party-of-death/

Boys, boys, boys–

You know just like I do that seperation of church and state as expressed in the first amendment, is a reiteration of the secularity ( state shall make no laws concerning religion) and the freedom of excercise of religion…. it’s pretty clear if you read the words in the amendment…in fact it was our old friend Thomas Jefferson who talked about the “wall of seperation” between church and state as outlined by the Bill of Rights,don’t tell me you guys don’t like Jefferson because he wasn’t a Republican ?

I usually consider him an even BETTER source than Fox or O’Reilly.

Chas, so can you point to the words in the first amendment that indicate any separation of anything? It seems you are just “wishing” it in there when it actually isnt there. I think the amendment is pretty clear, government shall NOT impose a state religion. I’ve read Jefferson’s letters to the Baptists, I guess we are just going to disagree with what the meaning was. I take it as a reaffirmation of the 1st amendment, that government will NOT impose a religion on the state (nation)

The plain meaning of the 1st clause of the first amendment is very clear. Where it gets messy is in the actual application.

For example, I would argue for equal endorsement for all. If a town wants to put up a nativity on the courthouse lawn during the christmas season, no problem: as long as they put up a Mennorah during the high holy days and a star and crescent during Ramadan. (of course, right now, both the Jewish and Moslem symbols would be up together. THAT might cause a stir)

How many of the majority christians would protest the Islamic symbol and see no problem with the nativity?

By the same token I have a serious problem with schools that try to ban Moslem girls from wearing head scarves as an interference with free exercise. Try banning “jesus” t-shirts for a day and see what happens. I’ve always felt that the controversy a few years ago in one of the St. Louis suburbs (was it Ladue?) about an after school Bible club was messed up. If a school provides space for a chess club (student run with a faculty sponsor), then why not Fellowship of Christian Athletes or Campus Crusade? Ban one, ban all, allow one, allow all.

To Sub Par Cerebellum,

The strict constructionists on the Supreme Court in their attempt to discern the meaning and intent of the founding fathers in the constitution have relied heavily on the letters of Jefferson, and his phrase “wall of separation”. Don’t you believe in strict constructionist judges? Actually I have doubts about your belief in the constitution. You consistently refuse to understand the 1st part of the 2nd amendment. You know the part that reads “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state”. Then there are the checks and balances in the system. Do you believe in the unitary presidency of George Bush? Is that why Rove and his band of thieves can ignore subpoenas? Can you point to any words in the constitution that describe Cheney’s function other than as a tie-breaker in the senate that make him a part of the Legislative Branch? As a constitutional scholar frankly you suck. Thankfully we will soon have a president that understands constitutional law as he has been a professor of it, at a prestigious university. Can you guess who that might be?