O'Donnell: separation of church from state"not in Constitution"

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

She is correct. I challenge you to find the words 'seperation between church', or 'seperation of church and state', or any dirivative there of in the US consitution.

Or 'God', or 'Christ'.

She is absolutely correct. That wording nor any dirivative there of exists in the constitution of the US.

So do you adhere to literal construction or original intent?

Seems it was Coons, the self avowed Marxist, who didn't know the constitution.

Nor, apparently, did James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution" and author of the First Amendment.

Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history.

http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/detach.htm

Madison was also against any government support of religion (which could arguably extend to tax priveleges) and taxpayer-funded chaplains for Congress and the military.

So do you adhere to literal construction or original intent?

Before I can answer that question common definitions must be established.

[the_tyrant]

Moved to separate thread

[krashkart]

* deleted out of respect for the thread *

[SteamWake]

Yea lets bring things she 'might' say into the discussion now that were diverted away from the out of context original topic. Thats solid stuff there !

[krashkart]

Sorry Steamwake. I'll edit that out.

[the_tyrant]

Originally Posted by krashkart

Sorry Steamwake. I'll edit that out.

Me too

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Yea lets bring things she 'might' say into the discussion now that were diverted away from the out of context original topic. Thats solid stuff there !

"out of context original topic"? I resent that...

I don't think I misrepresented her views and if you read the blurb I quoted, it does appear that she does not believe that the Constitution defends separation of church and state, not that she does not know what the First amendment means.

I don't think O'Donnell is dumb. Her stand on the separation of church and state (or lack thereof) is followed by many conservatives.

My problem with her is more her extreme right wing views and her attack dog style of politics, but then there are many candidates like her running for office right now. She just seems to attract more publicity.

Picking on her now is more of a trial run for 2012 when Palin squares off against Obama ......now that should be fun...

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Before I can answer that question common definitions must be established.

I usually hold that to be a requirement for discussion on 'Separation' as well. What do you mean by 'Separation of Church and State', and why does that make you for or against it.

I personally believe in 'Separation', which for me means that the Government is not allowed to interfere with religious beliefs (at least as long as they don't break any laws governing other rights of the individual), and Religion is not allowed to interfere with the Government. This does not mean that religious people can't hold government office - quite the opposite. It means that Religions organizations can't tell the government what it may or may not do.

As to my comment on 'Literal Construction' and 'Original Intent', it's something that I trot out sometimes in cases like this. I observe that sometimes the same people who insist on Literal Construction (i.e. "If it doesn't say it, then it doesn't mean it") in this context are the same ones are the same ones who follow Original Intent ("You have to explore what they really meant") in cases like the Militia Clause of the Second Amendment.

I'm not saying you do that, which is why I asked. But some do, which is why I felt the need to ask.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/detach.htm

I found this one interesting:

Originally Posted by Madison

The growing wealth acquired by them (corporations) never fails to be a source of abuses.

Sorry to stray off topic. Carry on.