Quote:

---

Just when you thought Christine O'Donnell, the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in Delaware, could do nothing further to top herself, she does.

At a Tuesday morning debate with her Democratic rival Chris Coons, she appeared to be aggressively ignorant of the fact that the First Amendment requires the separation of church and state.

Making matters worse, the audience was actually filled with people with presumably more than a passing familiarity with the Constitution: law professors and students.

---

Quote:

---

The exchange came in a debate before an audience of legal scholars and law students at Widener University Law School, as O'Donnell criticized Democratic nominee Chris Coons' position that teaching creationism in public school would violate the First Amendment by promoting religious doctrine.

Coons said private and parochial schools are free to teach creationism but that "religious doctrine doesn't belong in our public schools."

"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him.

When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"

Her comments, in a debate aired on radio station WDEL, generated a buzz in the audience.

"You actually audibly heard the crowd gasp," Widener University political scientist Wesley Leckrone said after the debate, adding that it raised questions about O'Donnell's grasp of the Constitution.

---

Quote:

---

Not only is this extraordinary because O'Donnell is running for the U.S. Senate, but she represents a political movement, the Tea Party, that has made a fierce adherence to the Constitution one of its fiercest principles.

---

Quote:

---

"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, prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, the "separation of church and state" phrase comes from Jefferson's clarification of the First Amendment's intent:

Quote:

---

"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, prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."

---

---

Quote:

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Again, separation of church and state does not appear in the ratified document. That's all Christine - the former teen age witch - was trying / DID say.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Again, separation of church and state does not appear in the ratified document. That's all Christine - the former teen age witch - was trying / DID say.

---

Sure it was.

Suuuuure.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by mal4prez:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Again, separation of church and state does not appear in the ratified document. That's all Christine - the former teen age witch - was trying / DID say.

---

Sure it was.

Suuuuure.

---

Exactly! This BS excuse that she was only pointing out the absence of those exact words is ridiculous. I don't have a transcript handy, but anyone who's really watched it will notice that she mentions the Supreme Court and interpretation of the Constitution, etc. She was NOT just talking about the presence or absence of five little words. She was talking about the concept, the principle.

I will find a transcript and post it... maybe...

Oh, and her "Fellowship in Constitutional Government" that she's been bragging about was a seven day course at a conservative think tank. Which didn't even teach her the damned Amendments.

Oh. My. God.

There hasn't been such a gift to the Democrats since Palin entered the picture. I don't whether to feel relieved that the truth has been revealed or completely horrified that an idiot like this has been able to reach such a level of recognition.

So I'm settled with just looking forward to this week's SNL. How much fun are they going to have with this?



-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Again, separation of church and state does not appear in the ratified document. That's all Christine - the former teen age witch - was trying / DID say.

---

Sure it was.

Suuuuure.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ElvisChrist:

At a Tuesday morning debate with her Democratic rival Chris Coons, she appeared to be aggressively ignorant of the fact that the First Amendment requires the separation of church and state.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
To try to say otherwise is to show your intellectual dishonesty as well as your immaturity.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
To try to say otherwise is to show your intellectual dishonesty as well as your immaturity.

---

I love how you've just adopted that as your catch-all. "If you don't agree with me, you're dishonest and/or immature."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
She tried to audit graduate level classes at Princeton (she has claimed that she was getting her Master's from Princeton, which she never attended in any capacity). When they refused because she hadn't finished an undergrad program, she tried to sue the school for negatively impacting her "future earnings" by not letting her attend a class she was unqualified to attend.

---

Quote:

---

Fourteen percent of Tea Party supporters have a post-graduate education...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
To try to say otherwise is to show your intellectual dishonesty as well as your immaturity.

---

I love how you've just adopted that as your catch-all. "If you don't agree with me, you're dishonest and/or immature."

---

Perhaps my sarcasm detector is off, I cannot tell if you are pretending to be dumb, or if you really do not comprehend the meaning of "intellectual honesty" and it's converse.

---

Quote:

---

On another facet, I was hoping to also see the transcript where she asked her opponent to identify the rights granted under the First Amendment (which is not, BTW, a "founding principle" of the ratified Constitution, no matter how much Jefferson wanted it to be - it's called an Amendment for a reason), and Coons failed to identify 4 of the 5 rights. Not only had she already been proven to understand more than he about the lack of seperation of Church and State, but also about the others (Press, Religion, Speech, Right to Assemble and Petition).
Unlikely to get an unbiased report from the lib media or their lackeys.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
Small fact overlooked about your poll numbers. The Tea Partiers represent in large part white, middle-incme or above people. For all they like to present themselves as "reg'lar folk", the fact is they do NOT represent regular Americans, which is what your poll shows. The "general public" includes those who cannot afford college, work at menial jobs, etc. The Tea Party does not.

What the poll actually shows is that a greater percentage of white, middle class Americans make up the Tea Party, which we already knew. Given the fact that there is a fair amount of racism within the Tea Party, as has been coming out more and more recently, and that they represent the "I've got mine, screw you" segment of society, it's not at all surprising that they've had more opportunities and make more money than the general public.

I don't think it's anything to crow about, however.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
She asked where IS the separation of church and state; if she'd said "where are the WORDS separation of church and state", you'd be right, but she asked about the PRINCIPLE, and the principle is clearly covered. Are you capable of undestanding the difference?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kaneman:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
She tried to audit graduate level classes at Princeton (she has claimed that she was getting her Master's from Princeton, which she never attended in any capacity). When they refused because she hadn't finished an undergrad program, she tried to sue the school for negatively impacting her "future earnings" by not letting her attend a class she was unqualified to attend.

---

She sounds like a liberal to me....Well, it's true....

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kaneman:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
She tried to audit graduate level classes at Princeton (she has claimed that she was getting her Master's from Princeton, which she never attended in any capacity). When they refused because she hadn't finished an undergrad program, she tried to sue the school for negatively impacting her "future earnings" by not letting her attend a class she was unqualified to attend.

---

She sounds like a liberal to me....Well, it's true....

---

Odd that you're still so vocally supporting her, isn't it?


The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.


Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

---

Quote:

---

John Quade (April 1, 1938 – August 9, 2009)

Quade attended Washburn University in the fall semester of 1956. He worked for the Santa Fe Railway repair shop in Topeka and as an aerospace engineer before his movie debut in 1972.

Quade starred in High Plains Drifter and The Outlaw Josey Wales with Clint Eastwood. He appeared in Papillon with Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman. He appeared in many television movies and mini-series including Roots and Dream West. Quade starred in two short-lived television series: Flatbush (1979) and Lucky Luke (1991).

He made many guest appearances on television shows ranging from Bonanza, Gunsmoke, Knight Rider (in the pilot episode "Knight of the Phoenix"), Buck Rogers in the 25th Century (in the two-part episode "The Plot to Kill a City" as a telekinetic supervillain),Roots (TV miniseries),The A-Team to On the Air.

Quade was an outspoken opponent of the U.S. government and believed it had become drastically different from the founding fathers' intent. He gave numerous lectures on the New World Order of the current government. In short, he was opposed to Section 2 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, Social Security numbers, and driver's licenses. He was often referred to as an "actor, aerospace engineer, and Christian activist". He was a supporter of the Allodial Title belief in common law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Quade

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
She asked where IS the separation of church and state; if she'd said "where are the WORDS separation of church and state", you'd be right, but she asked about the PRINCIPLE, and the principle is clearly covered. Are you capable of undestanding the difference?

---

She is more then technically correct. There is no question, seperation of church and state is NOT in the Constitution. That is a technical distinction and an important one.

Once past the technical aspect of this issue her response becomes philosphical and is actually very sophisticated. She is a Strict Constructionist. In other words its not in there and because its not in there she believes that you can't simply ignore the language that is present and substitute language you feel is more appropriate or reflective of the times. This is as much a conservative principal as cutting taxes.

So we have a technically correct answer and a philosophical position shared by millions of Americans, anything else? Yes, its also a statement against judicial activism. "What do you mean?", says you.

Seperation of church and state was a mere anecdote until the Supreme Court reached out and set it up in big, black, artificially created law. In 'Reynolds v. United States'(1878) the Supreme Court used the term for the first time in order to establish that religon could not be a defense for violating a "social duty"...in this case bigamy was illegal and the defense was the fella's religon required it. Later Courts expanded on the principal. This sort of activism can be very destructive, especially since it allows the Constitution's express amendment process to simply be bypassed by finding nuance to plain language.

So as you can see her answer was correct and true to her convictions.

Her opponant and the audience displayed a shocking lack of knowledge on the subject. That the media has this backwards in neither shocking nor unexpected...it is in fact typical and a big part of what is fueling the Tea Party's fire in the first place.

My own opinion about the Bill of Rights is summed up by one word..."penumbra"...and I thank the Supreme Court for teaching me that term.

H

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
I believe your argument contains fallacies.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:
The right to free pizza on Mondays, is not reasonably in the penumbra created by the Bill of Rights.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Jefferson tried to include Seperation of Church and State in the Constitution. The other "Fathers" balked and refused to include it, refused to ratify it, and it never survived the Constitutional Congress, hence it is not in the Constitution.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Can we make it Fridays, then?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Jefferson tried to include Seperation of Church and State in the Constitution. The other "Fathers" balked and refused to include it, refused to ratify it, and it never survived the Constitutional Congress, hence it is not in the Constitution.

---

He did not. He was in France doing the ambassador thing. His letters frequently refer to various rights including "Freedom of Religon" but not a seperation of church and state.

"By a declaration of rights, I mean one which shall stipulate freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of commerce against monopolies, trial by juries in all cases, no suspensions of the habeas corpus, no standing armies. These are fetters against doing evil which no honest government should decline." --Thomas Jefferson to Alexander Donald, 1788.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Jefferson tried to include Seperation of Church and State in the Constitution. The other "Fathers" balked and refused to include it, refused to ratify it, and it never survived the Constitutional Congress, hence it is not in the Constitution.

---

He did not. He was in France doing the ambassador thing. His letters frequently refer to various rights including "Freedom of Religon" but not a seperation of church and state.

"By a declaration of rights, I mean one which shall stipulate freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of commerce against monopolies, trial by juries in all cases, no suspensions of the habeas corpus, no standing armies. These are fetters against doing evil which no honest government should decline." --Thomas Jefferson to Alexander Donald, 1788.

---

Zero, you can't possibly be this dense. Jefferson HIMSELF coined the phrase in his letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, when he quite clearly DID say that the First Amendment was intended to build a clear wall of separation between church and state.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Jefferson tried to include Seperation of Church and State in the Constitution. The other "Fathers" balked and refused to include it, refused to ratify it, and it never survived the Constitutional Congress, hence it is not in the Constitution.

---

He did not. He was in France doing the ambassador thing. His letters frequently refer to various rights including "Freedom of Religon" but not a seperation of church and state.

"By a declaration of rights, I mean one which shall stipulate freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of commerce against monopolies, trial by juries in all cases, no suspensions of the habeas corpus, no standing armies. These are fetters against doing evil which no honest government should decline." --Thomas Jefferson to Alexander Donald, 1788.

H

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Jefferson tried to include Seperation of Church and State in the Constitution. The other "Fathers" balked and refused to include it, refused to ratify it, and it never survived the Constitutional Congress, hence it is not in the Constitution.

---

He did not. He was in France doing the ambassador thing. His letters frequently refer to various rights including "Freedom of Religon" but not a seperation of church and state.

"By a declaration of rights, I mean one which shall stipulate freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of commerce against monopolies, trial by juries in all cases, no suspensions of the habeas corpus, no standing armies. These are fetters against doing evil which no honest government should decline." --Thomas Jefferson to Alexander Donald, 1788.

---

Zero, you can't possibly be this dense. Jefferson HIMSELF coined the phrase in his letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, when he quite clearly DID say that the First Amendment was intended to build a clear wall of separation between church and state.

---

In this rare moment when you might have made a minor error, it appears you jumped too quickly.
I suspect Hero was specifically addressing the time frame prior to the completion of the Constitutional Congress, which I had referred to. Your reference is far after.

---

Quote:

---

The Constitution was composed long after Jefferson had defended the Baptists, I thought.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Zero, you can't possibly be this dense. Jefferson HIMSELF coined the phrase in his letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, when he quite clearly DID say that the First Amendment was intended to build a clear wall of separation between church and state.

---

Quote:

---

His letters frequently refer to various rights including "Freedom of Religon" but not a seperation of church and state.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
You referenced "his letters", not "his letters at the time". You were attempting to mislead people into believing that Jefferson never referenced the separation issue in his letters.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
You referenced "his letters", not "his letters at the time". You were attempting to mislead people into believing that Jefferson never referenced the separation issue in his letters.

---

We were discussing the drafting of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Why would I need to mention letters that occur so long afterward?

You obviously blundered into the middle of an ongoing discussion and did not bother to review the entire discussion for context. I was not being misleading, you were being ignorant and looking to nitpick.

Tell you what...I'll concede your one letter in 1802 if you'll concede he NEVER used the term during the thousands of letters, essays, the hundreds of debates and discussions during the huge national debate that occurred before, during, or after (till 1802) the drafting of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Then maybe the intent of 'Freedom of Religon' might be more clear and obvious. If Jefferson wanted as definative a seperation as is now being advocated...he'd have used the Amendment process, which he felt was among the most important parts of the Constitution.

H

---