Where in the U.S. Constitution is the phrase "Separation of Church and State?"?
927456
You already know that the phrase does not appear, therefore the provocative "I'm waiting..."  You already know that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment states that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."  \n\nI'm also sure that you are already aware of the letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, quoting the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, he writes: "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, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."   You might also want to recall the Treaty of Tripoli, in which it is stated that "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;..."\n\nObviously, if the founders wished to create a government in which religion would hold sway, or have a formal say in civil law or liberties, they could have easily done so.  They did not create a theocracy, but a democratic republic.  All of the above has been primarily interpreted to support separation of church and state, and the Supreme Court has upheld this "notion" time and time again.  It never fails to amaze me how some people persist in believing the founders intended this country to be based on religious (Christian) tenets.  They weren't idiots - if they wished that to be the case they could have clearly laid it out as such.  Their personal writings and letters reflect controversy of feeling over the matter, and quotes can be found to reflect both positions.  The proof in the pudding is that they chose to erect that wall, and did not choose to install a government run by religious leaders, and made sure those would be leaders had no power to do so.  Considering that the founders had widely differing religious leanings and knew the pitfalls of a government led by the "church," it probably wasn't a hard decision to reach.  The difficulty most likely lay in the language to be used.  There were religious leaders of that day who wished for nothing more than a theocracy to be created.  The founders had to reach a consensus on how to word the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to please everybody, and that included the theocratists.  They did such a good job that we are still arguing over it today.  We trust our Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution, and they have done so time and time again, in favor of the wall.  It's an integral part of our government, this wall, and if it weren't the Pat Robertsons and Fred Phelps of our nation would be dictating our laws and civil rights.  A scary thought, that.
362845
The phrase itself was from a letter to the Danbury Baptists by President Jefferson, in response to their worries that their state would give a rival Christian sect tax money and special privileges by law.  He told them not to worry, because the First Amendment was designed to form a wall of separation between chuch and state.
451864
George Washington said "“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion”\n\nI've never heard the quote you talk about. That being said, we have a "Christian" in office now, and look at the condition our country is in. I use the quote around "Christian" because I believe he is a false Christian. The last true Christian we had in office was Jimmy Carter, who is a great person, but a poor leader. True Christians do not have the pride, greed, or lust to be President.\n\nThe seperation of Church and State is not in the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence, wrote of a "wall of seperation between church and state" in a letter to the Danbury Baptists. The Constitution states government shall "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
94229
Well first we have to realise that there is no real seperation of church and State,  Read the real Constitutin, it only says that there will not be an official state religion and that the state can not pass any laws restricting religion.  It never says a world that the state is seperate from the Church, only the state can not interfere with a Church by passing laws effecting it.  ( and they look at all the church zoning laws, tax laws, minister requirements to do weddings and tell me they keep thier end of the deal)\n\nBut the idea of seperation of Church and State has been created from a speach made by Thomas Jeffereson to a religioius group and he was still refering to thier protection and rights.\n\nThe lie taught today is done to try and destroy the Christian teachings and Chrsitian hisotry of our nation.\nThat is the purpose of the teaching of seperation.
105262
America was founded on freedom.  Our forefathers didn't want the government imposing anything on its citizens.  In modern times, religious references in a public, governmental setting walks a fine line.
999583
According to the first ammendment any religious text on govenment property is supposed to be banned.\n\nBill of rights Amendment I\n\nCongress 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.\n\nThis part "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" means that congress cannot endorse any religion thus the separation of church and state. Any public funding or use of a publicly funded institution for religious activity would constitute use of government to "establish religion" and since all public funding requires Congressional law it is therefore banned.
1054486
Separation of church and state was adopted when our country was formed to prevent our governmet from sanctioning or adopting a particular religion as an official state religion. However, our constitution does make spiritual references. The fear at the time was that a government would do what England did in forming the Chrch of England. Religiuos freedom does not mean freedom from religion. Lots of our laws are based on spiritual beliefs (like the 10 comandments). If the overwhelming majority are  christian and opposed to gay marriage, they will elect representatives who will pass laws to restrict or ban it. If the constitution is strictly interpreted, there is nothig in there that makes a gay marriage ban unconstitutional. However, marriage in and of itself is a religious institution. If a religion is against gay marriage, does the government have the right to impose gay marriage on it? That may be protected in the constitution. I think the answer is civil unions. If the government performed and recognized civil unions and let churches and religious institutions perform marriages, there might be the solution. If you are Catholic for example, get married in a Church. As a Catholic you are married and seen as such by your relgion. Instead of a marriage license, you get a civil union license (which would be religion neutral) from the government. Then gay people can do the same. If they want to call themselves married, so be it. No religion is forced to adopt something against its beliefs and thegvernment separates itself from any religious implications by calling any legal union of 2 people a civil union. Just my idea though.
470954
True, it doesn't say verbatim "seperation between church and state", however that somes up the 1st amendment nicely.\n\nHow would you teach a specific religion in a public school and not consider that to be a favoring a specific religion above all others?
935993
The Constitution of the United States
303305
"Wall of Separation" between Church and State\nThomas Jefferson, as president, wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut on 1802-JAN-1. It contains the first known reference to the "wall of separation". The essay states in part:\n\n"...I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State..."\n\nDuring the 1810's, President James Madison wrote an essay titled "Monopolies" which also refers to the importance of church-state separation. He stated in part:\n\n"Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history."\n\nThe US Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment as if it requires this "wall of separation" between church and state. It not only prohibits any government from adopting a particular denomination or religion as official, but requires government to avoid excessive involvement in religion.
614574
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Constitution
456772
America is a secular country.  The main religion is the worship of the almighty dollar!\n\nThe United States has no official religion.  In contrast to the United Kingdom, in which the head of state is also head of the established church, the United States has a separation of church and state.  Freedom of religion is a fundamental constitional doctrine.\n\nHowever, Christianity is certainly the majority religion.  The United States has a more actively religious population than many other western democracies, especially the UK.
963929
This is a very good point, and i have actually researched it before.  In the Freedom of Religion amendment, there are two clauses: the establishment clause, and the free excercise clause.  The establishment clause is the separation of church and state, or in other words, the government cannot establish or promote any one relgion.  In the free excercise clause, the government cannot ban any one religion.  Oddly enough, atheism is only considered a religion in the free excercise clause, and not in the establishment clause.  This is a sort of loophole that allows the religion to establish atheism in schools, without going against our rights to freedom of religion.  Pretty messed up, huh?
414831
I don't understand how this country (US) could be founded on religion when the 1st amendment guarantees the separation of church and state. Politicians who seek votes by professing their religion don't look like idiots to me. To me they come across as being anti-American.
92500
The 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as interpreted by the courts, guarantees that:\n\n1. individuals will have freedom of religious expression; \n \n2. the government and its agencies will not recognize one religious faith as more valid than any other faith or secularism; \n \n3. the government and its agencies will not promote religion above secularism or vice versa. \n\nThis is what the Constitution guarantees. I agree with a lot of the current decisions out there that separate religion and state. Granted we maybe a majority Christian country, but one of our rights as a US citizen is not to be forced to partake in those cermonies. I do believe in tolerance for religion though. I believe that anyone can practice their religion in public as long as they do not force anyone else. And as long as no government official or program explicitly promotes any religion. The first amendment forbids that. You can read it below. Along with a quote written by a Supreme Court Justice.\n\n\n"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." (First Amendment)\n\n\n\n"When the government puts its imprimatur on a particular religion it conveys a message of exclusion to all those who do not adhere to the favored beliefs. A government cannot be premised on the belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers some." Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun in the Lee v. Weisman ruling, 1992.
527078
The establishment clause of the first amendment means that there shall be no 'official' religion in the United States.  It does not mean each and every politician must be an atheist.  For one to expect that a politician will totally ignore his or her religious convictions when making law is ridiculous.
698026
A letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists....\n\nThe Separation of Church and State\n \nby David Barton\n\nIn 1947, in the case Everson v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court declared, “The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach.” The “separation of church and state” phrase which they invoked, and which has today become so familiar, was taken from an exchange of letters between President Thomas Jefferson and the Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut, shortly after Jefferson became President.\n\nThe election of Jefferson-America’s first Anti-Federalist President-elated many Baptists since that denomination, by-and-large, was also strongly Anti-Federalist. This political disposition of the Baptists was understandable, for from the early settlement of Rhode Island in the 1630s to the time of the federal Constitution in the 1780s, the Baptists had often found themselves suffering from the centralization of power.\n\nConsequently, now having a President who not only had championed the rights of Baptists in Virginia but who also had advocated clear limits on the centralization of government powers, the Danbury Baptists wrote Jefferson a letter of praise on October 7, 1801, telling him:\n\nAmong the many millions in America and Europe who rejoice in your election to office, we embrace the first opportunity . . . to express our great satisfaction in your appointment to the Chief Magistracy in the United States. . . . [W]e have reason to believe that America’s God has raised you up to fill the Chair of State out of that goodwill which He bears to the millions which you preside over. May God strengthen you for the arduous task which providence and the voice of the people have called you. . . . And may the Lord preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last to his Heavenly Kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator.1\n\nHowever, in that same letter of congratulations, the Baptists also expressed to Jefferson their grave concern over the entire concept of the First Amendment, including of its guarantee for “the free exercise of religion”:\n\nOur sentiments are uniformly on the side of religious liberty: that religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals, that no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious opinions, [and] that the legitimate power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor. But sir, our constitution of government is not specific. . . . [T]herefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights. 2\n\nIn short, the inclusion of protection for the “free exercise of religion” in the constitution suggested to the Danbury Baptists that the right of religious expression was government-given (thus alienable) rather than God-given (hence inalienable), and that therefore the government might someday attempt to regulate religious expression. This was a possibility to which they strenuously objected-unless, as they had explained, someone’s religious practice caused him to “work ill to his neighbor.”\n\nJefferson understood their concern; it was also his own. In fact, he made numerous declarations about the constitutional inability of the federal government to regulate, restrict, or interfere with religious expression. For example:\n\n[N]o power over the freedom of religion . . . [is] delegated to the United States by the Constitution.Kentucky Resolution, 1798 3\n\nIn matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general [federal] government. Second Inaugural Address, 1805 4\n\n[O]ur excellent Constitution . . . has not placed our religious rights under the power of any public functionary. Letter to the Me