Reward Offered: $1,000 to Anyone Who Can Find the Phrase 'Separation of Church & State' in the US Constitution
FAIRFAX, Va., Oct. 25 /Christian Newswire
/ -- $1,000 is being offered -- including as a donation to CHRIS COONS' U.S. Senate Campaign in Delaware -- to anyone who can find the exact phrase "Separation of Church and State" anywhere in the United States Constitution, by Virginia attorney Jonathon Moseley. Moseley was the 2008 primary campaign manager for national Cinderella candidate CHRISTINE O'DONNELL.
In a US Senate debate Oct. 19, 2010, in Wilmington, Delaware, non-lawyer Christine O'Donnell bravely entered Widener Law School to debate lawyer Chris Coons on the Constitution before a crowd of law students and law professors.
O'Donnell called Coons on the carpet, correctly exposing Coons' misstatements about the First Amendment. Coons claimed that the phrase "separation of church and state" is found in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It is not.
When challenged by O'Donnell, Coons then changed his "story" several times, offering several different versions of the First Amendment. In the end, Coons offered yet another mangled misstatement of the First Amendment, to which O'Donnell challenged laughingly "That's in the First Amendment?" NONE of Coons' changing versions were an accurate statement of the First Amendment.
Moseley explained: "Despite the Left's attempt to amend the US Constitution by simply repeating "The Big Lie" over and over again, the phrase "separation of church and state" cannot be found in the United States Constitution. In fact, the words "church" and "separation" also are not found individually anywhere in the U.S. Constitution."
Moseley explained: "Constitutional evolutionists rely on a private letter from Thomas Jefferson to invent a "separation of church and state." Trouble is... Jefferson was not in the Constitutional Convention that wrote the U.S. Constitution. Jefferson was in Paris at the time. Jefferson was also not a member of the first U.S. Congress that wrote the Bill of Rights, either. (That first Congress also used U.S. Treasury funds to import 20,000 Christian Bibles.)"
Coons and the leftist media quickly back-tracked and tried to cover for Coon's gaffe, by changing the subject. The exchange was misreported by portraying the First Amendment as, in substance, including the functional equivalent of "separation of church and state."
However, this also is false. The First Amendment guarantees "THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF (of religion)." A wall of separation would violate the 2nd part of the clause, violating THE FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION.
"Any rule that makes religion or religious people unwelcome in any place or any aspect of American life is a violation of the 'FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION' guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment," Moseley explained. "There cannot be 'free exercise' with a wall of separation."
As a result, Christine O'Donnell's argument is correct that public schools may inform and teach students about a variety of topics. Public schools may not lead students in religious ceremonies, sacraments, or observances or advocate for a particular religion or denomination. However, public schools may, and should, inform students of the world around them including the role of religion in history and the details of religions in the surrounding culture, particularly major religions.
Even the U.S. Supreme Court itself has explained in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971): "Our prior holdings do not call for total separation between church and state; total separation is not possible in an absolute sense. Some relationship between government and religious organizations is inevitable.... Judicial caveats against entanglement must recognize that the line of separation, far from being a "wall," is a blurred, indistinct, and variable barrier depending on all the circumstances of a particular relationship."
Moseley also charged: "Coons also showed appalling ignorance about science as well. The heart and soul of science is questioning established thinking, challenging assumptions, challenging conventional wisdom, and debating both sides of every issue. It is not possible to prepare students to be competent in science without preparing them to look at scientific questions from different angles, examine assumptions, and ask questions outside the box. What Coons would have our schools teach is not science at all, but superstition. Presenting only one point of view without debate never has been and never can be called science. Even if Intelligent Design is taught only as a foil or teaching tool, one cannot teach science by offering only one view"
However, Moseley commented: "The U.S. Supreme Court has simply got it wrong on the First Amendment. Many Supreme Court justices in dissenting opinions have expressed great unhappiness with and outright opposition to the Supreme Court's unguided meanderings on the First Amendment. Christine O'Donnell is correct and joins the ranks of many learned Supreme Court justices in demanding that our country return to the U.S. Constitution as it is actually written. The law clerks over in the U.S. Supreme Court should stop reading people's letters and re-read the U.S. Constitution itself."