In Your Own Words Explain What This Means...

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: new_here

originally posted by: ERISunveiled
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

Congress cannot enact a law that establishes a state religion for the U.S.

And "separation of church and state" does not exist anywhere in the Constitution .

Those words do not appear in that order, no. Those words were written by Thomas Jefferson, who was not in the United States at the time the Constitution was written, to describe the effect of two particular provisions which are most definitely in the Constitution.

1) Article VI of the Constitution:

...The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

This means that the Government cannot demand adherence to a particular religion or any religion at all as a qualification for any office.

2) The 2nd Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...

This means that the Government can neither establish an official religion, nor can it prevent anyone from practicing their own religion.

Jefferson described the effect of these two provisions as erecting a wall separating Church and State and opined that this was an exceedingly good thing.

SO:
1) no special privileges, or discrimination against, for office holders because they adhere to a particular religion or not,
2a) no official State religion, and
2b) no Government interference in the practice of religion.
==> all CONSTITUTIONAL provisions
EQUALS: separation of Church and State - according to Thomas Jefferson

What part of Jefferson's Constitutional analysis is difficult for you to understand?

originally posted by: Gothmog

In a letter from Thomas Jefferson which led folks to mistakenly believe that it was in the Constitution .
And Jefferson did not mean that the way folks have misinterpreted it .

That is a sweeping indefensible statement unless you describe what you mean by "the way folks have misinterpreted it".

1) What do you think Jefferson meant? How do you know?
2) How has he been misinterpreted?
3) Who is misinterpretin Jefferson? Everybody? Most people? Academic historians? Non-academic historians? A few fringe contrarians? Religionists trying to take over the government? Everybody who isn't you?

originally posted by: incoserv

If we want to go down that road, then it stands that Jim Jones was just exercising his religious freedom on those 909 people who died in Jonestown.

No, that is rather hyperbolic.

While there can be no definition of what a 'legitimate' religion is, certain behaviours are repugnant to human society and civilisation. Religions tend to label these behaviours 'evil' but you don't need religion to tell you that murder is an act that must be condemned by society. While these 'repugnant' behaviours likewise cannot be absolutly tied down, society does have recourse to protect itself.

Jim Jones was practicing protected religious worship for awhile, but when he crossed over to poisoning his followers, he became a mass murderer, not a religious figure.

You cannot seek to justify evil