Herman Cain's Crazy Definition of Church-State Separation

Republic Presidential hopeful Herman Cain thinks he supports the separation of church and state, but in reality he has no idea what that phrase means.

Here’s what he said on Fox News this weekend, while speaking in support of communities having the right to ban mosques:

Our Constitution guarantees separation of church and state. Islam combines church and state.

When asked if a community should be allowed to ban a mosque, Cain responded,

Yes. They have a right to do that. That’s not discriminating based upon religion.

For logical people, it may be hard to understand how someone could promote mosque-banning and the separation of church and state at the same time, but perhaps I can add some insight.  According to Cain, Islam combines a set of laws (Sharia law) with religious beliefs.  Combining a set of laws and religious beliefs is mixing church and state, which U.S. law keeps separate.  Therefore, a community can ban that which combines church and state (e.g. a mosque).  Never mind that the phrase is actually designed to prohibit government from endorsing a particular belief system or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

What makes this flat-out religious discrimination, despite a claim to the contrary, is that Cain refuses to apply his logic to any other religion besides Islam.  During his interview, Cain supported his claims by arguing,

They’re objecting to the fact Islam is both a religion and a set of laws, Sharia law. That’s the difference between any one of our other traditional religions where it’s just about religious purposes.

Apparently the Ten Commandments, a codified list of moral imperatives found in the Judeo-Christian Bible, do not meet the threshold for “a set of laws” in Cain’s eyes since he is not allowing communities to ban churches as well.  If Cain truly supported his version of separation of church and state, every chapel and synagogue would be unconstitutional.  Earlier this year, he explained why the Bible’s set of laws is superior and allowed to mingle with state and federal law.

I support American law. Our laws were derived from principles that are biblically based. Maybe not said in the same words that are in the Bible, but our laws are derived from principles based upon the Bible.

Attempting to reconcile the varied and contradictory statements made by Herman Cain is futile.  He makes these statements because he is a zealot pandering to people that have been convinced their way of life is being attacked by anyone different from them. 

Herman Cain’s full remarks on mosque-banning can be viewed below.


herman-cain-fox.jpg40.16 KB
seo google sıra bulucu kanun script encode decode google sira bulucu google pagerank sorgulama seo google sıra bulucu ukash kanunlar


Islam is the only religion that boldly is an affront against America, Christians, and Jews. Anyway Islam is not a religion they are a political ideology that is disguising themselves as a religion to take advantage of our openness. We have a long history of attacks from Islam. We know that many of these Mosques are training grounds for would be more terrorists. So, I completely agree with Cains views against building Mosques in America. I do not think it is right that our tax dollars should be funding these. Government donations to build mosques is violating the Separation of Church and State. Christian churches build their own churches so if Muslims want to build their mosques let them do it out of their own pockets not OURS. The 10 Commandments are moral laws not governmental laws. Who could argue that they are not good for all? They do not have to be mandated by government nor does the church state that. It is a poor argument to even compare them to the likes of Sharia Law. Not even close. I see no inconsistency to Cains position at all. I do not have a problem for Mormons to build their tabernacles, and Catholics to building their cathedrals because I believe in freedom of religion but Mosques are not really religious institutions because Islam is NOT a religion.
Who is more unreasonable, a person who believes in a God they cannot see or a person who is offended by a God they do not believe in? I would say it is all of you yahoo's that are constantly offended by Christianity despite claiming there is no God. Are you equally offended by unicorns? If a politician uses his Biblical view to govern, all you get are some decisions based on what most consider morality.
This guy is dead on. He has thrown the lefts political correctness out the window. What this country needs.
Of course its not a contradiction to only ban mosques and not churches & synagogues. Just like the Bible has no contradictions.
It's possible that the guy just can't think straight. Seen it many times.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
seo google sıra bulucu kanun script encode decode google sira bulucu google pagerank sorgulama seo google sıra bulucu ukash kanunlar