O'Donnell The Bounty Hunter Offers $1,000 To Anyone Who Can Prove "Separation Of Church And State" Is In The Constitution

October 26, 2010 9:02 pm ET — Melinda Warner

Much has been made of the Christine O'Donnell / Chris Coons debate over whether or not the Constitution ensures the separation of church and state.

Now, a bounty has been posted to prove O'Donnell's point.

Jonathan Moseley, a Virginia attorney and O'Donnell's campaign manager during the primary, is offering a "$1,000 reward to anyone who can find the phrase 'Separation of Church & State' in the US Constitution." 

Moseley's press release goes on to assert that freedom of religion can't exist if church and state are separate, that teaching evolution is teaching "superstition," and that many Supreme Court justices agree with O'Donnell that we need to revert to a government by the Constitution as it was originally written:

The First Amendment guarantees "THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF (of religion)."    A wall of separation would violate the 2nd part of the clause, violating THE FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION.

"Any rule that makes religion or religious people unwelcome in any place or any aspect of American life is a violation of the 'FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION' guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment," Moseley explained.   "There cannot be 'free exercise' with a wall of separation."...

Moseley also charged: "Coons also showed appalling ignorance about science as well. The heart and soul of science is questioning established thinking, challenging assumptions, challenging conventional wisdom, and debating both sides of every issue. It is not possible to prepare students to be competent in science without preparing them to look at scientific questions from different angles, examine assumptions, and ask questions outside the box. What Coons would have our schools teach is not science at all, but superstition. Presenting only one point of view without debate never has been and never can be called science. Even if Intelligent Design is taught only as a foil or teaching tool, one cannot teach science by offering only one view"

Moseley commented: "The U.S. Supreme Court has simply got it wrong on the First Amendment. Many Supreme Court justices in dissenting opinions have expressed great unhappiness with and outright opposition to the Supreme Court's unguided meanderings on the First Amendment. Christine O'Donnell is correct and joins the ranks of many learned Supreme Court justices in demanding that our country return to the U.S. Constitution as it is actually written. The law clerks over in the U.S. Supreme Court should stop reading people's letters and re-read the U.S. Constitution itself."

Needless to say, it was Thomas Jefferson who interpreted the Constitution as providing for the "separation between Church & State." What with the Declaration of Independence and all, Jefferson is generally considered a credible source on all things regarding the formation of the United States (and is frequently quoted by Tea Partiers). 

The question here is, if O'Donnell and Moseley got their way and the barriers between church and state fell, what would they do if it wasn't their religion that was established after the wall came down?

Print