There was a debate between Christine O’Donnell and Chris Coons, and the way the media… I read this this morning, and I knew — I just knew but I didn’t have time to get into the details at the time, but I knew — with what I had read that it could not be this way. There was a story that was written in such a way as to make the reader believe that Christine O’Donnell did not know that the First Amendment prohibited the government from establishing a religion. The story was written in such a way they had Christine O’Donnell saying, “You’re telling me that’s in the First Amendment?” What she was talking about was this idiot Coons talking about “the separation of church and state.” She was saying, “Are you telling me separation of church and state’s in the Constitution?” because it isn’t.
There’s nothing in the Constitution about separation of which you need and state. It was Coons who couldn’t figure out what’s in the Constitution. It’s Coons who didn’t know what he was talking about. And so the panic in the State-Controlled Media, they write a story making it look like O’Donnell doesn’t know what she’s talking about. They had to misquote her and take her out of context in order to make this point. “Are you telling me that that’s in the First Amendment?” meaning, the government cannot officially sponsor a religion. That’s not what she was expressing incredulity over. She was incredulous that somebody was saying that the Constitution said, “There must be separation between church and state.” Those words are not in the Constitution.
Back to Delaware here. I’m reading this story today, and it makes it out like Christine O’Donnell did not know that the First Amendment forbids the establishment of religion by government. My first reaction when I read it was to call somebody. I said, “What the hell is this?” I said, “This can’t be. I’m not going to call anybody. This has to be an out-and-out lie.” Here’s a partial sound bite from a debate this morning in Wilmington. At the Widener Law School during the debate ba-da ba-da ba-da, a discussion of evolution and creationism, after Coons said, “Private and parochial schools are free to teach creationism but that religious doctrine doesn’t belong in public schools.” Christine O’Donnell and Coons had this exchange about “the separation of church and state.”
O’DONNELL: Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?
Read More: Rush Limbaugh
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
It is apparent the crowd listening to the debate were liberal and most have no idea what is in the Declaration of Independence. She was right in asking the question however now powerful enough to follow through. The people who vote for Coons are going to rue the day. Mark my word.
This would shock anyone, why is that again?
In fact, O'Donnell could not believe, contrary to actual language, that the First Amendment prohibited Congress from establishing religion. The First Amendment is by the way part of the constitution. It also prohibits Congress from interfering with the free exercise of religion. An Amendment that both prohibits establishment of religion and interference with religion can be fairly interpreted as separation of church and state. It may be hard for you to believe but Thomas Jefferson the writer of the Virginia Bill of Rights (protype for the bill of rights in the constitution) was the one that used seperation of church and state to describe the first Amendment. Madison who was at the Constitutional Convention reached the same conclusion. But what do they know? They were only the founders of the country. O'Donnell (and you) ought to actually read the Constitution. Maybe read the notes of those that were there. No don't read Madison. It would be too much work for you. And maybe too intellectual.
Frank,
I believe O'Donnell is correct & both you & Coons are wrong! Possibly you should read the article once again & possibly The First Amendment of The Constitution since you are so intelletually astute?
Wow, Caleb, have you seen the video? How can you pin this on "the media"? This self-proclaimed constitutional scholar is clueless. I wholeheartedly support the basic Tea Party principle of smaller government and fewer taxes, but this is a frightening candidate.
CWS,
I have seen the video & i agree with Caleb on this issue.
I don't get it. She clearly is confused. This isn't a selectively edited sound bite, it's a seven-minute segment.
I have to say there seems to be a move to label people, particularly politicians, and support them or not based on that label. In this case, Tea Party = good, therefore O'Donnell = good.
Again, I strongly support smaller government, and I don't have a vote in Delaware, but the lack of intelligence she displays is truly frightening. And the efforts to pin the blame on the media (Caleb went so far as to call it "State-Controlled Media"; really?) is mind-boggling to me.
CWS we are all entitled to our opinions!
Our opinions just do not agree is all!
I'd like to know just how many senators and congressmen have actually read the constitution.
I'd bet, not many.
They admittedly don't read the bills they vote on– remember "crazy Nancy", lets pass this bill so we can find out whats in it. And this dim bulb is suppose to be leading "We the People". She must go along with all the obama crowd !!
"Libs will always tell you all about what they do not know and then expect you to listen to their every word as if it were written in stone."
Black is white and vice versa, a lib lawyer such as Coons or BOsco, is going to prognosticate and shred veracity of fact at every given opportunity, especially when a document such as the Constitution a writ of plain verbiage and intent, stands astride their aims like a colossus. They are throwing peanuts at the elephant and trying to harm it.
Shall We Compare The Manchurian Paper-less Pres Obama The Chi-Town Wonder With Zero Talents, Unless You Count ACORN Trouble Organizer With His Bull-Shit Telepromter Speeches And Voting "Present" During His Short Tour At D.C. Now Our Whiner And Chief, Yikeess, I Will Listen To Miss Odonell Tell The Truth For Her Run In Delaware Senate, God Bless Christine Odonell, Yippee.
Caleb, this is a deliberate attack on faith. It makes no difference where and how you were raised, you have thoughts and beliefs that govern your actions whether good or bad. Few people know about the European persecution of so called heretics. They were in the minority and their history suppressed by those in the majority just as we are witnessing the rewriting of our history today but some of us old codgers still remember when it was different. Also those histories are preserved. The Lord does protect the truth.
We have hundreds of separate denominations claiming to be true follower of Jesus and that can't be true because we are not walking together. Our founding fathers did not pass judgment on denominations but all were controlled by their belief. Since the vast majority subscribed to Christian virtue and belief we could all pull together. Today, as Paul writes to the Corinthians we are showing that carnal nature we all have.
~ 1Co 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?~
To have a true separation of church and state then no one in the church could also be part of the state. I believe this is the way it actually is. The church has no responsibility to the state nor the state to the church. They are two separate entities yet have a big influence on each other. The government is of the world and the true follower of Christ is not authorized to use the power of the State. However the state rules over the unruly and must have the power of the sword to give it authority. I have no problem with this.
~1Ti 1:5 ¶ Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;~
The book of Daniel shows our proper response to this separation of church and state for they are separate and must so remain. However the state is not required to be Christian but the church is. We forget that America is an exception rather than the rule. And those advocating a separation of church and stare are actually advocating a separation of God and State for they reject God's rule over them just as Israel did in asking for a king.
How are you going to put someone in office that does not have some kind of belief and will act on that belief? Apparently if we reject any Christian influence in and on our government we are seeking the rule of tyrants. There is Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Castro as shining examples of separating the state from Christian influence.
Another George Saros/Barack Obama Twist Christine ODonnell Has More Class Than Both Of These Two Muslim WantABe Fools. If You Win Christine Nov 2 You Single Handed Beaten This Father/Son And Both Should Hide In Shame.Yippee, God Bless Christine ODonnell.
Typical Liberal Mainsteam News Media bias!
Hopefully O'Donnell & her campaign will cease the moment & make the voters of Delaware aware of the truth & in fact that it was Coons who could not explain The First Amendment of the Constitution.
No matter what is said the press if they feel like its a chance to hurt someone will change the words around. When the press is not on your side they will sure write against you.