Rosie O'Donnell. Who watches this "woman"? And why?

Seriously. Just one more turd sitting atop this pile of crap called Hollywood. 

Here's Rosie on "separation of church and state":

"The equality that we are all entitled to, as citizens of this democracy, can't be avoided by some religious dogma of a President who's supposed to believe in the notion of separation of church and state. And he frankly doesn't. "

Nor do I Rosie. I'll tell Rosie the same thing I told my brother-in-law in an e-mail . He was going on about the Establishment Clause in a way that showed that he had never really bothered to actually read it. Here's a bit of my response to him in that e-mail... and to Rosie:

I really hate when things are taken out of context just to make a talking point that's
thrown out like an absolute fact.
Here's the fact on that:
Use the name of that clause in its full form for accuracy. It's the
Establishment of Religion Clause. I believe there were several
variations on the wording in consideration, but the final agreement
between the House and Senate is "Congress shall make no law respecting
an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof."
That's it. That's the literal "Establishment of Religion" clause. The
words "separation of church and state" do not exist in the Constitution.
Those words were written by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to a Baptist
Association. Jefferson wasn't even at the Constitutional Convention! The
Supreme Court have made desicions that contradict this simply worded
statement and forever tainted its plain and literal meaning.
The Establishment Clause simply bars government from proclaiming there
to be a single national religion, and supporting (financially) any
single religion- hence our religious freedom. Thanks to that clause, we
don't have government telling us we have to pray to God, Buddah or
Allah.
Although it's been hotly debated, that is the simplest interpretation of
the Establishment Clause. Government cannot "Establish" any single
national religion. It's a protection from the government itself. Which I
am glad for. It has been suggested by a few that there be an absolute
separation between the government and religion... but has not changed
the literal interpretation of the Establishment Clause. The only reason
those simple words would need "interpreting" is to find a way around it
as far as I'm concerned. 

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment Preview