>> in violation of the constitutional separation of church and state.
Which Constitution are they talking about? I can't find the part about separation of church and state in the US Constitution, just a reference to no establishment of religion.
Oh it's there. You just have to hold it just right so the the light casts a shadow, it's right there in the penumbra.
I just hope this doesn't hurt Nicholas Jurewicz's career. When you're a butterbar it doesn't take much.
I emailed Mr. Weller, the writer of this article, on this very same point. He said that the First Amendment is interpreted as establishing a separation of church and state.
I emailed him back and said that the proper wording should have been "in violation of what SOME PEOPLE INTERPRET as the constitutional separation of church and state."
I then thought some more, and sent him another email. In it, I asked how he would describe, hypothetically, an email that contained quotes from 1 Corinthians 15. Would he say that the quotes made reference to "the resurrection of Jesus Christ," or to "what Christians believe was the resurrection of Christ"? I then told him that I believe more in the historicity of the resurrection than I do in the constitutionality of "separation of church and state."
I have yet to hear from him...