You can’t jam a major arms control treaty right before Christmas. What’s going on here is just wrong. This is the most sacred holiday for Christians.
–Fred Edwords, the national director of the United Coalition of Reason, speaking to the New York Times about running “Good without God” messages around the country. Must resist urge to sign over checking account to this guy.
Merry X-mas to all!
I disagree strongly with the concept of separation of church and state. It was not written into the Constitution. While we have a Constitution that is very strong in the sense that we are not gonna have a religion that’s sanctioned by the government, it doesn’t mean that we need to have a separation between government and religion. And so that, that concerns me a great deal.
This is why you have to point out O’Donnell’s foolishness early and often:
Are you telling me separation of church and state’s in the First Amendment? It’s not. Christine O’Donnell was absolutely correct – the First Amendment says absolutely nothing about the separation of church and state.“
–Rush Limbaugh
And he’s right…if your requirement for Constitutional legality is based on applying some sort of misguided Biblical Inerrancy to the Constitution and its legal meanings, then you’re going to be disappointed re: church and state. This is, not coincidentally, also why the very same Tea Klanners see a major difference between:
separation between church and state
separation of church and state
These are seen as completely different statements. And one of those two is coming at you straight from Hitler. And you want the facts to matter?
That the establishment clause of the first amendment implicitly creates a separation between church and state is unimportant to the Tea Klan. They are reading this as the literal string of words and most definitely not for any deeper meaning. We don’t want to cast our lot in with a bunch of pointy-headed lawyers, now do we? The words separation, of, church, and state do not appear. Period. Furthermore, "In God We Trust” is on the currency; the Tea Klan worships Lord Jesus, so that word “God” must mean Christian God and not, say, Tiamat, God of Chaos. That it was put there relatively recently is utterly unimportant: the facts do not matter. It is there; we are a movement made up of Christians, therefore the US must be an inherently christian nation, (because some of the founders were, in fact, Christians) and thus we should be, on that basis, ruled by christian laws, morals, and ideals.
Look, the Tea Klan has about 10 preferred narratives. You’re not going to beat any of them based on the facts or some sober assessment of the deeper meanings of the Constitution and its amendments. The facts simply do not matter.
The only way you beat these memes is by linking them inextricably in the minds of the broader populace with outright lunacy. As soon as anyone starts talking about nullifying the 17th amendment, you need a large fraction of the population to link that with nuts like O’Donnell and instantly, reflexively turn off. Oh, 17th amendment again, that is a rube’s issue, this person must be a nut just like that know-nothing O’Donnell. Wait, didn’t I hear Sharon Angle talking about that same crap? That makes me uncomfortable, no matter how strong she is on the menace of Social Security. Hey, why is the GOP nominee for President yapping on about the 17th amendment just like that crazy woman did? Thus ends the Tea Klan.
Christine O’Donnell: “…perhaps they didn’t teach you Constitutional law at Yale Divinity School.”
Chris Coons: [Creationism, implicitly “a religious doctrine,” should not be taught in public schools due to the Constitution’s First Amendment.]
Christine O’Donnell: “The First Amendment does? Let me just clarify: You’re telling me that the separation of church and state is found in the First Amendment?”
Chis Coons: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,”
Christine O’Donnell: “That’s in the First Amendment…?”
We’re talking about a militant terrorist situation, which I believe isn’t a widespread thing, but it is enough that we need to address, and we have been addressing it. Dearborn, Michigan, and Frankford, Texas are on American soil, and under Constitutional law. Not Sharia law. And I don’t know how that happened in the United States. It seems to me there is something fundamentally wrong with allowing a foreign system of law to even take hold in any municipality or government situation in our United States.
[Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa)] said the problem in 1995 wasn’t the government shutdown under President Bill Clinton – which occurred after Republicans attached Medicare cuts and other items to spending bills – it was that Republicans blinked when they feared the polls were turning against them.
“We must not blink,” he said, noting that money cannot be spent without the House voting to pass it. “If the House says no, it’s no.”
Their new tea party backers won’t tolerate anything less than a full repeal of the health care law, he said.
“They will leave us if we go wobbly,” he said. “I am worried about that, but that’s why I think it’s got to be a blood oath.”
First off, what form of whistle-speak is this whole “not blinking” or “you can’t blink” thing? It comes up with alarming regularity and has the unmistakable ring of that ever popular, not-actually-in-the-Bible-but-definitely-coming-soon The Rapture (what, you think the Tea Klan’s most sophisticated eschatologists have actually read the Bible? Or know who Cotton Mather was? They haven’t, don’t, and won’t).
Secondly, and much more importantly, government shutdown will be Job One of any new GOP majority in the House. Carve it in stone. This will be immediately followed by repeated articles of impeachment (regardless of what the Senate does with said articles, should the Senate remain Democratic, of course), based on said shutdown: e.g., the GOP will shut the government down, then blame Obama for said shutdown’s effects, and then accuse him of “high crimes and misdemeanors” relating to the ontogeny of said shutdown (he made us do it, more in sadness than in anger! We are the Patriots here! And we mustn’t blink. Ever. No blinking.). Watch and see. Preferably without any blinking.
[Steve King quote courtesy of the Washington Monthly]
Joe Scarborough [2003]:You’re going to stop the whole country from having sex?
Christine O’Donnell: Yes
The relevant letter (e.g. the one containing the words “separation”, “church”, and “state”) from Thomas Jefferson to “messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.”
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
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. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem.
(signed) Thomas Jefferson
Jan.1.1802.
Indeed, these are undeniably different in any and every sense of interpretation possible:
“separation between Church & State”
“separation of church and state”
Mr. Glen Urquhart, the GOP nominee for the race for Delaware’s lone House seat has attributed the latter to Hitler and the Nazi. Jefferson, you can plainly see, wanted a purely Christian republic on these shores. This is why he used the word “between.”
Adding Judeo to the Judeo-Christian formulation is simply an example of American Exceptionalism and is largely predicated on Jefferson’s own ruthless and unyielding support for the state of Israel. And, of course, there’s always a little Madison in there.
Said it once, will say it many times in the future: the facts do not matter. Plan and act accordingly.
The exact phrase ‘separation of church and state’ came out of Adolf Hitler’s mouth. That’s where it comes from. The next time your liberal friends talk about separation of church and state, ask them why they’re Nazis.
Lemkin 