Someone posted this request, and I thought it would a good one to riff on. Keep in mind, that I will not be bashing religion, the right to practice, or anything of that nature. I will deal only with the facts, all the syntax that anyone wants to infer, they are invited, Sir or Madam, to keep it to themselves. My interperetation is based on factual information, and any and all attempts to get me into a theological debate, debate over propaganda biased in any direction, i.e. anything other than a correction if I have mistaken a FACT, will be directed shortly into the Circular File. (That is the trash.) Definition of fact: an item of information that is known according to logical, verifiable sources, and based solely upon what actually has transpired, what actually is, and not based upon opinion. The Statue of Liberty exists would be a fact. 2+2=4 is a fact. You know what I mean. If you don't and proceed anyway, Circular File.

Okay, now to begin. What is the Separation of Church and State? Well, it begins with the First Amendment. The First Amendment provides for the free exercise of religion. Whatever God or version thereof that you believe in, you have the fundamental Right to do so, or not to do so as you see fit. Be you Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Agnostic or Atheist, that is your business. And nobody can make you renounce it or convert to their belief system without your consent. It also says that Congress can make no "law respecting an Establishment of Religion." This is called the Establishment Clause, if memory serves. This means that Congress can have no influence over or FROM any religion. So, any "faith based" measures are technically no-no's.

Next, let's delve a bit further: The actual phrase, "separation of church and state" is from Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Church Association. He wrote this while in office. There was some further Supreme Court hi-jinks, yes, yes I know. But that is the source.

Next: Those who claim there is none. There are two major caveats, and those are first the Establishment Clause, and second that there is no mention, whatsoever, in any way, shape, or form, of God or Christianity or Jesus, or the Pope, nothing at all, mentioned in the Constitution, other than what is in the Bill of Rights. (i.e., the First Amendment. The "Under God" bit in the Presidential Oath was an Ad-lib by Washington.) Since there is no mention, the Constitution is therefore a secular document, and separated from the Church, in all ways and means. QED. (Or quod erot demonstratum, latin for thus it is proven or demonstrated.)

Now some people say it isn't true, despite all the evidence that is presented. To deal with the Pledge of Alleigance and our currency: both ideas had been presented before Congress and Presidents before being passed by Eisenhower in the 50's, and before then it was considered a bad idea, but he didn't think so. It has been suggested that both were enacted primarily as another degree of separation between the US, where religous rights are protected, and the Soviet Union, which outlawed religion. I can neither confirm or disconfirm if that was the motivation. I can't, unfortunately, go back in time and ask him, and neither can anyone else.

Now, the next step is to ask Why was the separation provided for? Good question, and an answer will follow. The answer is that most of the Framers, Founding Fathers, whatever you may call them, all had the benefit of a classical education, be it formal or informal, and many posessed a good working knowledge of History. What this means is that they were well aware of the many, many wars of religion that had been fought, and how it just meant bad news. Therefore, they determined that the religion of their country had to remain separate from the government of their country so that the Government's business was separate from God's business. In the past, when the two collided, it led to abuses of power, and also to persecution of anyone who had the gall to disagree, and that again, led to bad news. The Spanish Inquisition, for instance. NOT a good thing. The Framers knew that the involvement of Church powers in government's led to those sorts of things.

Also, at the time, there was a great shift in thinking towards "Natural Rights," or "The Rights of Man." The key idea is here that we all, as humans, have fundamental rights that can't, or shouldn't, be violated by anyone, be they from the government or the clergy. The protection and promotion of those rights was of the utmost importance to them. The reasons for it were just as much cultural as historical.

Again, I am just going off of what is factual and known. If I have left out any actual facts, let me know. I will edit them in, but please, I need a source, and the John Birch Society Website does not count. Like I said, I am just discussing the reason for and the definition of the Separation of Church and State, as pertains to the legal terminology. If you want to discuss anything about this that deals with fact, please do so. If you want to call me a devil worshipper just because I am quoting the historical record and not saying what you want to hear, please keep it off my page. You can message me about it, but bring your A game.