Added: 1 year ago
From: krumpetznightmare
Views: 19,045
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (174)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I'm about 3 months late on this post, but meh.

    Most people have posted the true quote from the constitution, but no one has said were the phrase "separation of church and state" came from. The Supreme Court first used "Separation of church and state" in one of their rulings to paraphrase the constitutions direct quote.

    Either way, she is still an idiot for not knowing that their is no exact text in the Constitution. or not knowing it was a paraphrase.

  • It doesn't actually say that in the constitution, this is just a case of when something is so accepted in our culture that we just assume it was in the thing that helped kick start our country. The rude, ignorant crowd laughing is why I'm not a democrat, and the biased agenda (in general) is why I'm not a republican either.

  • @neofryboy "The phrase does come from a founding father in reference to our government."

    This information is in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article that shows up on the first page of a Google search for "separation of church and state." So you aren't providing any new information or anything that couldn't be found by 5 sec of typing on a search engine. Wikipedia isn't even a fantastic source, but your comment is still a "duh."

  • Well, it is an appropriate question. "Where in the Constitution is the phrase 'separation of church and state'"?

    Actually, that phrase does not appear in the Constitution.

  • @hilleliza True, but we can't tell if she's being literal or dumb. Need more video. The phrase does come from a founding father in reference to our government.

  • wish we saw more context

  • It is hard to determine if she is being sarcastic or literal. I want to say she's dumb for saying that because it LOOKS like she's implying not only those words are not in the constitution, but also the principle is not in the constitution either. I wish there were more to this video. And others who criticize without knowing should think again. I'll have to thumbs down because this video is clearly only to make somebody look bad. Otherwise why not show what she was responding to?

  • i wish i saw how this fits into the whole.

    who knows what this was a response to?

  • The bible belongs in the fiction section of the library with all other fairy tales

  • All you idiots saying, "Well, technically the phrase 'Separation of Church and State' isn't actually in the constitution" can shut the fuck up.

    The basic principle of "separation of church and state" is in the first amendment:

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion . . ."

    Sounds like separation of church and state to me.

    The fact that its worded differently doesn't deter the fact that the principle is there.

  • @kmac639 No one said the principle was not there and i completely agree with you but i believe she was speaking on the "exact wording"...like i said not a fan of hers but one would assume as much seeing as how she was laughing as well...(i would like to have "faith" that man is not as stupid as we all think she is)

  • And people still think she is qualified...

  • One should not laugh at a question when one can not answer it.

  • She can read??

    She's a witch!!! A witch!!!!

  • she dyed her hair brown

  • I think you should stop being mean to witches. Its halloween next weekend. She'll come for your kids

  • She's technically correct that those words are nowhere in the constitution. The audience is laughing at her cause they think she's stupid when in reality they are. lol

  • @TheMusic2007 absolutely correct....I'm not a fan but she is technically right and all the idiots laughing should really go back and read the exact wording of the document

  • @pablopac All those "idiots laughing" are Harvard Law graduates, so I would really just stfu.

  • @Dblaz3r and that gives them credibility for not knowing the wording of a document...i think you should do exactly what you typed and shut the fuck up. this is not a pissing contest, its about what is right and wrong due to technicality...she is right, they are wrong Harvard or not. you're welcome.

  • @pablopac same here, i'm not a fan either but at least she's read the document she wants to be tasked with upholding.

  • i dont get it

  • @131dara she basically saying that nowhere in the constitution does it say seperation of church and state. i dont like her but sadly she is right, and the crowd seems to think that it does say it in the constitution. Shes an idiot, but idiots can be right sometimes, like 1/10000000000000000 chances

  • i really do not get it, uploader can you enlighten me

  • I hate to be hard on one of my own sex, but what a dumb bitch. FRIGHTENING

  • Schadenfreude.

  • this makes me a sad panda...

  • As much as I want her to be wrong here she's actually right... The phrase seperation of church and state is not in the original document of the Constituition. The concept is, however, referenced in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution.

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

  • @hybridinsurge thats the same thing. the constitution doesnt say "everyone can have guns!" it say right to bear arms etc etc

  • It says nothing about religion getting involved in government only that gov can't get involved w/the church(es). So, she's right. 100%.

  • @markfrav Dear inbred southerner

    Freedom of religion and its a democracy the very foundations invovle yet again FREEDOM. Sooo you can go tickle her ass hole and eat her shit.

    have a nice day

  • @fugehdehyou Inbred southerner I may be, but I can type and use the de facto language of our country properly. Your unintelligible "response" needs clarification please. And while Christine is not unattractive, she and I are unrelated, so by your so called insult we can't do the ass tickling you seem to hold in such high regard.

  • @markfrav No dip, the knife cuts both ways, quit being brain washed.

  • @beta331 , no it doesn't, and for the record I think she's an idiot. Not wrong here, but an idiot.

  • @markfrav ARE YOU SERIOUS? That is the exact hypocrisy that is bringing our nation down, you can't have it one way but not the other. The church's beliefs interfere like crazy but that doesn't mean that they are supposed to. The only inference that can be rationally made from those words is "Separation of church and state"

  • @beta331 , I agree with you. But look and see how much the church gets involved. LEGALLY! I'm not saying she's morally right. Just correct in her phrasing. Okay? The phrase "separation of church and state" came from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote. It's not in the constitution. I really do agree w/you. 100%. Religion, all types, have been the source of society's woes for thousands of years.

  • "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

  • "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." that's the actual quote from the bill of rights. now i guess she was right in terms of the actual phrase but i honestly think she doesn't understand the concept itself.

  • This is really sad....not bc she said that...but bc all the morons laughing think its actually there....people really need to read the constitution for themselves....morons....

  • @hardrocker943 It is there. Not in direct terms but if you can't infer that from the constitution, you need to be institutionalized. Don't hear one person say it isn't and be brainwashed by all of the republican propaganda.

  • Yet another example of Prejudiced bigotry brought on by not hearing the full story.

    ...Ah I love youtube : )

    Want what she was actually stating in that comment, look up the full video.

  • Oh and I'm not voting for her because I can't she's not in my area

  • Wow she's right it's not in there lol still funny

  • aw man, so fail, it's hilarious... and so sad so very very sad.

  • "separation of church and state" is not verbatim, only implied in the Constitution as we have come to interpret it. So that being said, yes she is correct that the verbiage is not there, but what she was really asking no one could be sure.

  • Its funny because she thinks that the crowd is laughing WITH her.

    But really we're all just laughing AT her XD

  • @TheFlamingVomit sxephil much!?

  • Someone's never read the first amendment...

  • Im from Toronto...what is this about

  • @wiisports505 basically in the constitution it says there is a separation

    apparently she didn't get the memo

  • Haha Christine thinks they're laughing with her lololol.

  • @cLGenocide They are laughing at themselves for not knowing anything. Obviously.

  • The term itself was just created afterwards to sum up what the Constitution explains quite clearly.

  • The Constitution says that every aspect of the government must be described by law. It then restricts the ability to write laws to Congress. It then restricts Congress from writing laws about religion. This means there can be no laws about religion. This means religion can't be an aspect of our government. This intentionally careful logic in the constitution created a wall of separation between the church and the state, which we commonly reference as "separation of church and state".

  • Comment removed

  • What a dumb hoe.

  • what a fucking idiot!! I'm 16, who took AP US History last year and I knew she was literally too stupid to be in office!

  • The phrase "Separation of Church and State" is synonymous with the phrase from the constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The first person to start using the shortened phrase was Thomas Jefferson, one of the architects of the Constitution. Since then there has been numerous Supreme Court rullings using the phrase. Both phrases mean the same thing so everyone needs to stop pretending they don’t.

  • This stupid idiot gives conservatives a bad name...damn Republicans are pissing me off!

  • this is why we had social studies, People so we dont say dump shit like Christine O'Donnell.

  • @kinggodzilla87

    Apparently you need to retake this course or get a better teacher

  • This is what she is thinking;

    Make a witty remark : "Where in the Constitution does it say separation between church and state?"

    OH! What a good response from the audience!

    That deserves a drink of the finest filtered water...

    **take sip casually.

    Awwwwwhhhh....Fuck yea....

  • I can't really hear it.

    Where in the constitution .....?

  • This is why people should not be judged on a 20 second video. If you watch the entire debate she was actually being factual that no where is church and state actually appear and the people actually laughing should no better

  • is she being sarcastic???? Who are the people supporting her to be in politics in the first place? is it just to get kicks out of the stupid things she says?

  • She needs to see this video and I want to be there to see the look on her face.

  • This is so sad. Poor girl.

  • she's like a new version of dumbass.

  • Oh gawd... the embarrassment! IT BURNS!

  • only one person is christine o'donnell (1 dislike)

  • ...New Palin? Haha stupid anti masturbation witch girl douche

  • i wish there was a vid showing her reaction when they told her that it did say it

  • @rohitsroya25 there is a video of this. It is a longer version of this one.

  • im confuzed...whats the joke here? i dont get it

  • @tjhall1000 It is basically in the constitution

  • @tjhall1000 The constitution says that "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion." Which basically means separation of church and state. And she thought the crowd was laughing with her. But, it was quite the contrary.

  • @SimpleShorts

    that is so hard to understand lol im shocked so many ppl even knew wut it ment in order to laugh at her

  • @tjhall1000 It's not that difficult. It basically says that a law will not be passed because the church said it should.

  • @SimpleShorts Wrong. It's there so the government can't persecute a specific religion.

  • @hardrocker943 They should remove it then. Less child molesting, more people that believe in things that actually exist.

  • @hardrocker943 Well the part that says the govt can't pass a law to "hold back" a religion is for that reason but the part that prohibits laws being made because the church thinks it should be is what we think of when we hear "separation of church and state". So yes, it was put into place so the govt can't persecute religion but it was also so that religion doesn't make our laws.

  • @tjhall1000 i hope you are being ironic/sarcastic

  • first fucking amendment jesus christ

  • @masterkayaki I know right!.. I could see not being so familiar with it if it were one of the more obscure numbers like 17 or 23.... But it's the FIRST ONE!!!!!!!

  • She is right that nowhere does the constitution say SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

    But if you would do a search of THE TREATY OF TRIPOLI Article 11 it is clearly stated and made clear by the congress that the United States of America is in no way founded upon Christian Ideals nor is it in any way a Christian nation. Its clear as can be right on paper and proves once and for all the Religious aren't given free roam because they belief the country is Christian.

  • @Bloodshotbuddah WOW!!!! That is BEAUTIFUL!!! Great find :) .. It also declares that we shall never become enemies with Muslim nations based on their religious views and practices... Yeah, that worked out well huh? :(

  • When she finds out they weren`t laughing about her, it will feel soooooo embarresed

  • good god.

  • For those who are saying the phrase "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." means the same thing as "separation of church and state", it doesn't. It calls for the separation of state FROM the church, but not necessarily vice versa. King Henry VIII declared himself supreme head of the church in the 1500's, pushing aside the Pope and his powers. Those who fled to what has become America were fleeing religious persecution.

  • @Jacam405 Don't forget taxation.

  • @Jacam405 Wrong, it means there can be no persecution of someone because of their religious beliefs AND there can be no state-sponsored religion (ie the state using tax dollars to teach a narrow-minded fantasy believed by just one of many religions in public schools.) So the state cannot be for or against any religion.

  • @eluminated Yeah, I forgot to add in the persecution, but the rest of your reply is exactly what I said, only detailed out. That IS separation of state from church. I wish I could have written more, but I had to edit what I wrote even just to fit it in. But you can't say it's wrong and then expand on the point that you "disagree" with. :)

  • @Jacam405 Well nah, because it does mean both, the 'vice versa' you're talking about. The state cannot be influenced by church dogma (not expressly anyway) just as the state cannot censor or support a religion. So it is both separation of state from church as well as church from state.. that's what I was disagreeing with.

  • @eluminated Oh okay. I disagree with you, but I understand your point now. Thank you for clarifying in a respectable manner. That doesn't happen much here on YouTube! :P

  • @Jacam405 I know :) I do try to be civil... TRY! lol But I don't see what you disagree with.. I think it's pretty cut and dry. The government is not to interfere with religious issues nor is it to be directed by them.

  • Technically, she's right. It doesn't specifically specify the separation of church and state in the bill of rights, as evidenced by "...One nation, under GOD...".

  • @HHBones Where in the bill of rights does it say "one nation, under god"?

  • @xiKUDx It doesn't say that at all... that was added to the Pledge in the 1920's or 30's.

  • @eluminated actuality even later than that it was added in the 1950s as a response to communist 

  • @captpoodle Was it that late? I thought it was earlier than that..

  • @HHBones Yeah thats part of the pledge, not the constitution :O. The "under God" was added to the pledge in the 40's or 50's.

  • Comment removed

  • I'm Scottish, so I really don't understand this... can someone explain this?

  • @ilovekolx The guy had mentioned that O'Donnell supported teaching creationism as a science in public schools and that this violated the 1st Ammendment of the Constitution which basically says that there can be no persecution of religion nor state support of any religion - they have to be separate. The really funny part is that she claims to be running on a platform that demands the government adhere strictly to the rules of the Constitution, but apparently she's never read the thing.

  • @eluminated Thanks :) i'm only 15 btw just incase you were all thinking that Scottish people are retarded haha

  • @ilovekolx she is some random idiot that came out of nowhere that is running 4 senate. She is always in the news 4 her mediocre mind-set

  • @StarWarsPlace slow down. she is actualy running for office and she isn't familar with even the most rudimentary principles of one of the most famous political documents in north america let alone the U.S. i thought she was just some like comidian chick or something. please god tell me she is losing badly.

  • @StarWarsPlace Not random. She, Beck, Palin etc are used by both the Repubs and the Dems to destroy the growing liberty movement that the "Tea Party" once was, for a very short time from '07 to '10.. The repubs use her to manipulate the message into the same old neo-con, christian-right horseshit and the dems use her (quite easily) to discredit the movement altogether. She and her ilk have now come to represent the Tea Party when it was NEVER meant to be anything such idiots could represent.

  • Alright she is right in the fact that nowhere in the constitution does it say separation of church and state. It does say, however, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." . This basically means the separation of church and state. Today we have come to terms that this specific point in the constitution that we get separation of church and state. Still, I bet she had no idea about that, because she is honestly a retard.

  • Comment removed

  • @bobdole1102449 ah k, thanks. I live in canada and i'm not that familiar with the specifics of US laws

  • @bobdole1102449 Yeah, the term "separation of church and state" is never actually used but I guess the founders just kinda figured everyone would be smart enough to understand what their words mean... Apparently they were wrong! lol... As far as what exactly she DOES think their words mean I guess we'll have to wait until she actually reads the Constitution to find out.

  • @bobdole1102449 dude i hate Christine o'blah blah, but truth be told 'separation of church and state' really isn't in the constitution in the way we'd like to portray it is in our society.

    the founding fathers were mostly religious people who formed this country out of frustration at being persecuted for their beliefs. That part of the constitution wasn't meant to separate church from state. Only to PROTECT church from state. Church has always and will always be very involved in our government

  • Comment removed

  • @xXConfuocoXx Dear me. The church as never been involved in our government. If it HAD then they would have mentioned it in the US Constitution. they would have mentioned that religion is important to government. But they didn't because they did not want religion being involved in state affairs and vice versa. They did, however, allow free practicing of religion because the King Henry had restricted this right from them. The last thing they wanted was to be British, where there was no separation.

  • @xiKUDx you guys are taking my statement wrong. I never meant that the church as a body was actually involved. I meant we've always had a place for God in our government in some form or another. They just didn't want people persecuted for whatever religion they might practice. That was the only purpose of that part of the constitution to protect the church (any church) from state persecution. It never said that you have to keep church separate from the state

  • @xXConfuocoXx No. That's re-writing history. The founders DID NOT fight and found this country because they were "persecuted for their beliefs!" And SOME founders were christian and yet (somehow) they managed NOT to mention jesus or god ONCE in any of the founding documents. Was that some kind of accident? If they wanted the government of this country to be "christian" they would have written it that way. Hell, they could've established a theocracy if they wanted! But they purposely did NOT.

  • @eluminated Finally someone with common sense on Youtube!

  • @eluminated You seriously didn't even read my comment. The founders were religious people (mostly) - thats a fact, and they didn't want the state persecuting the church (or any church) so they wrote that part of the constitution to protect the churches from state legislation that could persecute them, because that was one of the main issues they had with crazy ass england. when i said Church has always been involved i never meant that they wanted the nation to be "christian"

  • @xXConfuocoXx But they also didn't want the church influencing the government. "Church has always and will always be ...." is just plain wrong. It was expressly kept OUT of the government at the time the government was being created from scratch. Some people like to BELIEVE that christianity had something to do with it, but then why isn't there one mention of christianity? It's just as easy to say Aristotle and Socrates were what influenced the founders most.

  • @eluminated The only founding father that wanted religion expressly kept out of government at the time was Thomas jefferson, the same guy who coined the phrase "a wall of separation between church and state." But that phrase was never actually in the constitution.

    and my statement "church has and always will be..." is most certainly not wrong. Religion has played a huge role in the shaping of this country, and judging by the way things have been going... it always will.

  • @xXConfuocoXx And name ONCE where religion has "shaped" this nation. . Some religious leaders may have jumped on board and voiced support for things but none of it was originally rooted in religion. Not the abolitionist movement, not black civil rights, not women's suffrage, none of it. If religion were responsible for those reforms then those issues would have never existed to begin with because religion would have solved them outright.

  • @eluminated Right. Try reading Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream" speech and tell me he wasn't fighting for equality from a God-centered, Christian point of view. Get out of here.

  • @eluminated religion has shaped this nation. To say otherwise is ignorant. You mentioned things that involved the slave trade. Most of the nation at that time was Christian based. You must know that eventually slaves converted to Christianity. But wait, we have Christian slave owners that have enslaved other Christians? Yes, that is correct. In fact, to justify the slave trade slavers used something from the Bible, known as The Curse of Ham. This of course, prolonged the slave trade.

  • @2o9sfinest My argument is with those who claim that we are a "christian nation" and that the religion of christianity is what should govern our society. As a conservative I'm disgusted by that kind of thinking because rule by religion does nothing but harm and is always used to justify the very worst actions a nation can carry out with regards to individual freedoms as well as the treatment of other nations. There is no such thing as a "christian conservative"... don't let 'em fool ya! :)

  • @eluminated as harmful as the slave trade may have been, it progressed the country. Like you said, this country should never be called a christian nation. But religion and/or moral beliefs influence everyone

  • @eluminated Now, to say that religion hasn't shaped this country would be equivalent of saying "the slave trade hasn't shaped this country." To say that is further ignorance. I have named ONCE where religion has shaped this country. In fact, i have named what this country was built upon. Cotton Kingdom is what they called the South. This was because more than 50% of the world's cotton was supplied by the Antebellum South. This would not have been possible without slaves being legal.

  • @2o9sfinest Hold on dude, we AGREE! lol When I implied religion hasn't shaped this country I was talking about in any GOOD way! lol Absolutely religion was used to justify slavery as well as the killing of the native population, and all kinds of other shit! The debate was over whether we owe religion for any of the PROGRESS this country has made, and my point is that we don't. The abolitionist movement, civil rights, women's rights, etc - none of those things were official religious movements.

  • @xXConfuocoXx This country was shaped by science, technology, individualism and free market capitalism - none of which have anything to do with religion. If christianity were responsible for the advancements that this country has made then Europe would have beaten us to every one of them long, long ago.

  • @eluminated Not true. Most of the country's best universities (Princeton, Yale, Harvard, etc) were originally protestant seminaries (pastor training). And the freedom and equality that make us unique are beliefs originally derived from Christian values. By the way, America was established by Protestant Christians leaving Europe because of oppression. Protestantism is not strong in Europe at all, so no they wouldn't beat us in advancements for that reason.

  • @DeathStrawberry15 you realize that almost all of our founding fathers didnt accept the Christian religion as their own.....

  • @DeathStrawberry15 "the freedom and equality that make us unique"

    Do you really think the United States has a monopoly on Freedom and Equality?

  • @xXConfuocoXx The only time "a god" is implied is when they use the words "their creator".. Which they purposely left vague. If they were as christian as people nowadays claim they were they could have easily said "Yahweh, the god of Moses, father of Jesus who was born to a virgin and died for our sins, Amen"... but they DIDN'T! And their silence on the subject is what tells the story. I seriously doubt they were nearly as religious as people now try to make them out to be.

  • @eluminated It never says "their creator" in the constitution. The only mention is in the date... when it says "the year of our lord'. stop making things up and spittin em out as fact bro. Their silence is because they wanted this country to be a country of religious tolerance. they didn't want an established State religion. that doesn't mean that their personal religious preferences cant play a role in their politics or policies.

  • @xXConfuocoXx Well I'll give you that "creator" is in the Declaration, not Constitution (I had a brain fart) but otherwise you're proving my point. They kept their personal religious beliefs (whatever they were) out of the formation of the government.. and if they were so very religious, why would they do that? Also, like a guy posted earlier, look up the Treaty of Tripoli Article 11 - it expressly states that America is NOT a "christian nation."

  • @xXConfuocoXx that is totally debatable and for all I know the founding fathers could have meant exactly what you said. Still, the power given to the supreme court by the judicial review allows the Supreme court to interpret the constitution as they seem fit. Which by the way is perfectly in the boundaries of the constitution itself. That being said the supreme court has interpreted that part in the 1st amendment as separation between church and state.

  • @bobdole1102449 An anti masturbation witch retard

  • @bobdole1102449 well you should probably be easier on her, the way its written makes is sound more like "separation of state and church", which is probably why she didn't understand a section of the constitution of the country she is running for political office for...

    ...yikes...

    or she may have been trying to stump her opponent because she knew it doesn't actually say that phrase!! Brilliant!!! ... but my money's on the first one =)

  • @bobdole1102449 thats not separation of church and state thats saying you cant pick a favorite religion and that you cant persecute any religion that isnt seperation

  • @bat353 Uhhh, what? It's saying that the government can neither favor or persecute a religion... meaning they can have very little to do with religion in at all. Explain how that's not separation of church and state...

  • @bobdole1102449 wow you are such a partisan hack it's near unbelievable. Just because someone you don't support had a valid point doesn't mean you had to make up some "they probably didn't know bs" when she was obviously trying to make a point, which she was right about!

  • @guitarhero0000 Lol, your criticizing someone named with the username "bobdole" for being a partisan hack, because he thinks Christine O'Donnell is dumb. Judging by your username I’m going to take a wild guess and say that you have no idea who Bob Dole even is. By the way, people think she is dumb not because of their partisan opinions, but because there is video evidence depicting her on many occasions being dumb.

  • @bobdole1102449 that's quite convenient for you isn't. "she was right but i bet she didn't even know that", good work buddy, can you teach me how to be psychic?

  • @bobdole1102449 Correct sir! Just for fun, you may or may not know that the phrase "separation of church and state" comes from Thomas Jefferson's remarks in a letter. He wrote, "The 1st amendment has created a wall of separation between the church and the state."

  • Someone explain to me what just happened? I'm Canadian....

  • @toothpicktower1 a political candidate just asked a question about one of the most fundamental aspects making up the US's law and freedom when she was trying to prove a point. it means shes a dumbass. as everyone already suspected.

  • i dont get it....or care

  • Silly Woman

  • 0:08 LOL

  • You know, the constitution doesn't actually say "separation of church and state". it just says the gov't can't make laws that restrict people's beliefs. The concept is there to protect the churches from the gov't. not the other way around unfortunately.

  • @062389 It's also there to prevent a national religion. Go read the establishment clause of the first amendment. I assume you just watched the Philip DeFranco show but he isn't providing an accurate picture.

    TL;DR -- It's perfectly fine to laugh at her.

  • @martyelm Caught me. I did actually google info for it and ended up on the 14th amendment. I'll check out the 1st amendment.

    I'm not American so I'm not too familiar with the constitution and what not. I'll have to go through the Canadian one and see if there's anything in there about it.

  • this bitch needs a dick in her mouth to shut her the fuck up

  • yay, go USA!

  • You know, I don't blame her. Just take a look at the Tea Party and how all this religious fanatics think we can't have morals without religion in politics. What would the founding fathers say to this? Probably " I'm not a Witch, I'm You".

  • How has she even gotten this far. Can we impose a test of some sort for candidates to weed out people like her. Maybe the same test immigrants have to take to naturalize.

  • @waitwhatwasthat You realize she is right correct? where is your test? The constitution does not mention separation of church and state.

  • @BradleycBird Well if she's trying to be cute I guess those exact words are never used, but that's the summation of the words that ARE used.. And judging from the fact that the context of her remark was why she supports creationism being taught as a science in public schools she is not just trying to be cute.... and, sadly, she's not TRYING to be a complete moron either.

  • The turns and proudly smiles at the audience like she thinks she just burned him. She doesn't realize everyone is laughing at her.