It seems like the media is just ready to pounce on anything Christine O’Donnell says and deem it crazy.
Case in point: This the AP headline this morning:
O'Donnell questions separation of church, state
The article reads as follows:
Republican Christine O'Donnell left her law school audience buzzing when she challenged her Democratic opponent to show where the Constitution requires separation of church and state, and a day later, the two Senate candidates are set for more face-to-face forums.
"Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked Chris Coons Tuesday, drawing swift criticism from him, laughter from the crowd and a quick defense from prominent conservatives.
Coons, an attorney, responded that O'Donnell's question "reveals her fundamental misunderstanding of what our Constitution is. ... The First Amendment establishes a separation."
She interrupted to say, "The First Amendment does? ... So you're telling me that the separation of church and state, the phrase 'separation of church and state,' is in the First Amendment?"
Her campaign issued a statement later saying O'Donnell "was not questioning the concept of separation of church and state as subsequently established by the courts. She simply made the point that the phrase appears nowhere in the Constitution."
Conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh made the same point in his radio program soon after the debate, saying, "There's nothing in the Constitution about separation of church and state."
Is it just me or was she not factually correct when she asked, “Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?” She’s right. Those words are not in there. Those words come from a letter penned by Thomas Jefferson.
Here’s the real issue: O’Donnell is clearly fed up with Coons and other liberals trying to stand behind the “Separation of Church and State” concept. This happens all the time. Coons was trying to use the Separation of Church and State” line as a basis for the fact that evolution shouldn’t be taught in local school districts. O’Donnell wasn’t going to let him get away with that.
The First Amendment reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
When liberals start to use the phrase, “Separation of Church and State”, it gives them cover for a whole range of issues in their attempt to strip references to God out of any sphere of the public square. They never like to really mention the second line of the First Amendment where it says, “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
You want proof of what I’m saying? Watch below where MSNBC gives only the first part of the First Amendment definition, not the part where it says, ““or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
Go: 50 seconds into the clip below.
That clips shows that the media’s liberal bias is healthy as ever. Where is the context about how the "Separation of Church and State' concept has been inappropriately applied through the years.
Could O’Donnell been clearer that she was referring to the actual words of “Separation of Church and State”? Sure. But to paint her as some sort of kook who doesn’t understand the Constitution is intellectually dishonest. I mean just do a quick Google search on Antonin Scalia and the words “Separation of Church and State”. You’ll see that he and O’Donnell are on the same page when it comes to how people have abused the “Separation of Church and State’ concept.