Tea Party Favorite O'Donnell doesn't know 1st Amendment- Seperation of Church and State

When was the last time that anyone in here has read the Constitution?
There is NOTHING anywhere that makes any statement on the separation of church and state!

Geesh! Read the thing, people

reply to post by toolstarr


A) She is correct that the term separation of church and state is not in the constitution, nor is it in the constitution in a general sense based on modern day socialist definition. The constitution prohibits congress from setting up a national church or restricting the free exercise of religion. A little bit of history can go a long way on this subject as it is related to the Church of England and one of the primary causes of migration to North America.

B) It doesn't matter. The only questions of any importance are - 1) Does she support federal government expansion? and 2) Will she sign over her votes to the banksters? She could be a comedian on SNL for all I care so long as her vote isn't paid for by banksters to drive everyone in to poverty circa 1933 and 1873.

C) Nicely omitted by all of this is that she asked her opponent if he could name 5 rights granted by the 1st amendment and he could not think of anything other than "separation of church and state". He must have a different version of the constitution than I do.

Originally posted by Submarines
When was the last time that anyone in here has read the Constitution?
There is NOTHING anywhere that makes any statement on the separation of church and state!

Geesh! Read the thing, people

Her campaign issued a statement later saying O'Donnell "was not questioning the concept of separation of church and state as subsequently established by the courts.

Argue amongst yourselves.

Originally posted by maybereal11

Originally posted by camaro68ss
hope she wins just to make all you libs mad. I love how you dig up every little bit of dirt on her but when it comes to obama..................................................................cant dig up dirt on our dear leader!

This seems to be the destructive attitude of many on the far right...eager to support racists and proud idiots...because they think it will "make liberals mad".

The threshold for support by the far right has de-evolved into...the dumber the better...For the sake of the country, as well as the GOP, how about you stop thinking like a 5 year old.

FYI - When a candidate proudly makes an idiot out of themselves on national TV during a debate, it does not qualify as "digging up dirt".

O man i really hope she wins just to make you mad. good luck with your hope and change. see you on NOV. 2

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by maybereal11

Originally posted by camaro68ss
hope she wins just to make all you libs mad. I love how you dig up every little bit of dirt on her but when it comes to obama..................................................................cant dig up dirt on our dear leader!

This seems to be the destructive attitude of many on the far right...eager to support racists and proud idiots...because they think it will "make liberals mad".

The threshold for support by the far right has de-evolved into...the dumber the better...For the sake of the country, as well as the GOP, how about you stop thinking like a 5 year old.

FYI - When a candidate proudly makes an idiot out of themselves on national TV during a debate, it does not qualify as "digging up dirt".

O man i really hope she wins just to make you mad.

good luck with your hope and change. see you on NOV. 2

I don't think the "politically retarded" constitute enough of a voting base to elect the kind of candidates you are hoping for.

Originally posted by ararisq
reply to post by toolstarr

 

C) Nicely omitted by all of this is that she asked her opponent if he could name 5 rights granted by the 1st amendment and he could not think of anything other than "separation of church and state". He must have a different version of the constitution than I do.

and this news item is so NOT being reported

these people laughing at her and belittling her are demonstrating their ignorance, not hers.

Originally posted by ararisq
reply to post by toolstarr

 

A) She is correct that the term separation of church and state is not in the constitution, nor is it in the constitution in a general sense based on modern day socialist definition.

She questioned whether the Establishment or Free Exercise clause were in the constitution. Specifically ""Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.. or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"...she questioned whether that was in the constitution...point blank.

Secondly..."modern day socialist definition "? Are you referring to Thomas jefferson? The author of that passage in the constitution? In 1802...

Jefferson wrote a letter ...in 1802 to answer a letter from them written in October 1801.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. -Thomas Jefferson

www.usconstitution.net...

Originally posted by ararisq

C) Nicely omitted by all of this is that she asked her opponent if he could name 5 rights granted by the 1st amendment and he could not think of anything other than "separation of church and state". He must have a different version of the constitution than I do.

Provide video like I did, or transcripts...anything.....Support your BS.

edit on 20-10-2010 by maybereal11 because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-10-2010 by maybereal11 because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by works4dhs

Originally posted by ararisq
reply to post by toolstarr

 

C) Nicely omitted by all of this is that she asked her opponent if he could name 5 rights granted by the 1st amendment and he could not think of anything other than "separation of church and state". He must have a different version of the constitution than I do.

and this news item is so NOT being reported

these people laughing at her and belittling her are demonstrating their ignorance, not hers.

Ya know what else is not being reported? That she has three husbands and 22 children that she has abandoned...I'd provide a link, but it isn't being reprted by the evil MSM....this is easy.

Provide evidence or STFU.

Quick note...his statement at 7:00mins of the video.

"The government shall make no establishment of religion..."

Show me where this is in the Constitution and I will concede my position and stance that she is the one that is factually and contextually correct in this debate.

I guess I will have to repeat myself on this subject, which was exolained in another thread about the same topic.


Not sure if anyone has explained where the term seperation of church and state comes from, but, here I will attempt it again.

Fifteen years after the Constitution was written (1802), Thomas Jefferson sent a letter to the Danbury Baptists Association; this group feared they had no "inalienable" right granted to them by the state of Connecticut to worship as the wanted and felt they were only granted a favor by the goverment; this fear came by this group being a minority. So Jefferson replied to the groups concerns assureing them they could continue to worship as they wanted, in this letter the term "seperation of church and state appears. In jefferson's letter the exact wording of the 1st amendment was stated, also in this letter was a explanination of the "establishment clause" saying it "created a wall to seperate church and state" meaning religion is protected from the state not the other way around.
So yes, even though I didn't support Christine O'Donnell she is right; no where in the 1st amendment is the phrase "seperation odf church and state"