Robertson is a Church & State issue?

The new buzz phrase from the left that the mindless are repeating (without understanding why) is that Robertson is proof of the threat to Church & State. I added the phrase "without understanding" because of an exchange with a left-wing drone at Minnesota Blue

First, why do I call him a drone? Because while people give him "props" for being a kid and blogging on current events he has really done very little to show original thought. He repeats the buzz words and catch phrases. There is very little explanation of his reasoning. His liberal buddies think that because he is a "kid" he should be free from criticism.

Well I have to say that if this is the type of thinking process the schools are turning out then we are in trouble. TEACHERS, please teach the kids HOW to think instead of the standard HOW to regurgitate.

OK, back to the logicless.

This week Pat Robertson has dishonored the name ’Christian’ and embarrassed our country by calling for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, saying US Special Forces should “take him out”.

Whenever a radical Muslim uses his power and influence to call for violence, America urges to moderate Muslims to disavow them and their message. Pat Robertson used his influence, power, and public airwaves to call for the assassination of a foreign leader. Christians everywhere should disavow him and his message.

Pat Robertson does not speak for all Christians and he certianly dosen't speak for all Americans.

If anyone is still looking for proof that we need to maintain a seperation of Church and State, this is clearly it.

First he did not necessarily embarrass the country. The world would have been a much better place if we had assassinated Sadaam 10 years ago. The left should be all over such assassinations as they would prevent future military action.

Robertson did use his influence, power and airwaves (the airwaves were privately paid for, unlike NPR or PBS). Why is the left all over Pat but not Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or Louis FarraKHAN.

What I find interesting is how the left is calling all Christians to disavow one person's message, but they cannot bring themselves to call for Muslims to condemn Muslim terrorists. And odd double standard.

By the way, Christians who think that Robertson is doing harm to their religion SHOULD say something or accept the perception that they embrace Robertson's comments.

By the way, Muslims who think that the many terrorists are doing harm to the religion SHOULD say something or accept the perception that they embrace the terrorists actions.

It is the final thing that MN Blue said that is telling...the whole idea that Robertson is a danger to the concept of Church & State. When he was asked about the rationale behind this claim the response was:

This has everything to do with church and state. Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and James Dobson use their base of supporters to rally against indivdual freedoms and religious rights. Pat Robertson would like to do everything in his power to turn America into a theocracy.

You forgot Jesse Jackson!

I do understand that Pat Robertson is in the minority here, but these theocrats are very well funded and are very powerful. The extreme right wing has the tools and the resources to be very dangerous.

You mean like the Howard Dean/MoveOn.org factions? Or the Michael Moore freaks?

This product of the present day school system also linked the number of people Robertson can influence as evidence of Robertson's danger to the country. In other words in MN Blue's perfect world if you are religious you must not be allowed to exercise your freedom of speech to influence people. And seriously, what is the true point of free speech?

It does not matter if Robertson influcnes 5 people or 500 million people...he is not the government. Here is the logic that MN Blue is using.

1) Robertson is religious
2) Robertson gives opinions on international events
3) Robertson is a threat to church & state.

Sorry, Robertson is entitled to his opinion. If he can influence people then more power to him, that is the entire point of Free Speech. Simply because he (like Martin Luther King, Jr) is a religious leader with positions on political/national/international matters does not make it a church & state issue.

What MN Blue's school obviously failed in teaching him is what church & state really is. Church & state did not come from the Constitution...it came from a letter by Thomas Jefferson. Before you lefties embrace that as proof that such a doctrine was embraced by the founders I suggest you read it (without teacher assistance...they failed already in getting the kid this far on the topic, they will fail on this letter).

Back to C&S. It was 100% about federal government endorsing one specific religion. Nothing more. In fact, Jefferson's aforementioned letter acknowledged the state's endorsing a religion. It was not until the Court of the 1950s (FDR's Court) started creating a concept of Freedom FROM Religion.

However, if you STILL stand by the logic that Robertson represents a church & state issue, I expect to see you condemn Rev. Jesse Jackson as well...or at least realize the hypocrite that you would be by not doing so.

People of the Right, the enemy has a new catch phrase and talking point. All things now threaten Church & State. Challenge them on this point. Make them defend it (don't provide the attack, only challenge their claims). They will not be able to HONESTLY defend it...there is no intellectually honest defense of this Church & State talking point.