The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[scaeagles]

I have heard the soundbite. I believe her contention was that the phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution...and indeed it isn't. I do not think after hearing it that she was surprised that the concept exists, only that she disagrees with the interpretation. As you all know, the phrase came from a letter from from Jefferson to a church to assure them that the government would not be interfering with them.

From Wikipedia (not my favorite source, but the quickest one to find) -

The separation of church and state is a legal and political principle derived from various documents of several of the Founders of the United States. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." The modern concept is often credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke, but the phrase "separation of church and state" is generally traced to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, where Jefferson spoke of the combined effect of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. His purpose in this letter was to assuage the fears of the Danbury, Connecticut Baptists, and so he told them that this wall had been erected to protect them. The metaphor was intended, as The U.S. Supreme Court has currently interpreted it since 1947, to mean that religion and government must stay separate for the benefit of both, including the idea that the government must not impose religion on Americans nor create any law requiring it. It has since been in several opinions handed down by the United States Supreme Court, though the Court has not always fully embraced the principle.

While that is the currently accepted phrase, it isn't in the Constitution. I honestly don't think she was shocked about the principle coming from there, but that she was pointing out that those words do not exist in the document. It could be that people here find that more concerning than her supposed ignorance.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I have heard the soundbite. I believe her contention was that the phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution...and indeed it isn't. I do not think after hearing it that she was surprised that the concept exists,

You didn't get far enough. Coons brings it up again, and quotes the first ammendment (no law establshing, etc. etc.) she says, "That's in the first amendment?" Start at 7:07 in the clip JW linked to.

I'm sure he would have if he were asked. However, they weren't the topic.

O'donnel did later ask him and he was unable to answer, after which he said something like, "hey, isn't the moderator supposed to be asking the question."

[Moonliner]

Another interesting take on this issue.

Originally Posted by Bad Astronomer

There are a lot of things to note in this video. The first is that multiple times she ducks Wolf Blitzer’s question about whether or not she thinks evolution is a myth, saying that her beliefs about evolution and creationism aren’t important; what’s important are local schools and what they can teach. That is utter baloney. As a Senator, she might be asked to vote on bills that are directly or indirectly involved with this issue, and her personal belief is very important indeed.

And why duck the question? Is she ashamed of being a creationist, or simply trying to avoid looking foolish on television?

Second, and more importantly, is her comment:

What I will support in Washington DC is the ability for the local school system to decide what is taught in their classroom… [I was talking about] a classroom that was not allowed to teach creationism as an equal theory as evolution. That is against their Constitutional rights and that is an overreaching [of the] arm of the government.

Wow. There is so much wrong in this one statement!

First is her thinking that creationism is on equal footing as a theory as evolution. That’s not only wrong, it’s spectacularly wrong, as wrong as saying astrology is on equal footing as astronomy. We might as well teach the Stork Theory of baby delivery in health class, and the Tooth Fairy Theory in economics.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Another interesting take on this issue.

Bwahahahaha, I missed that stuff (it wasn't on the clip I saw, which was just the First Amendment stuff). Too bad. I don't want her ducking her position on evolultion. It's vital that it be out there more, if people are going to grok my Halloween costume.

(The El Mio theme this year is Fairy Tales, Myths and Legends.)