What Does Separation of Church and State Mean? | 5 Minute Video 

Here's PragerU's argument: The Constitution doesn't say separation of church and state, it's just an outside statement by a founding father. Now, to prove the Constitution wants religion in government, here are a bunch of outside statements by founding fathers.

It means that the state has no place telling churches/religion what to do, and religion/churches have no place telling the state what to do. Not that difficult to understand.

Guys, we need SOURCES and graphs with DATA. Scary phases like 'crime rates increased dramatically" accompanied by the graph bar tripling in size means nothing without reference points, and it makes you look as bad as CNN. Well maybe not that bad... but get it together!

I like how on multiple occasions, this video is like "let's see what someone wrote on a personal level and use that as evidence" when it agrees with them and other occasions "we shouldn't go by the personal letter" when it disagrees with them.

It means I don’t want the state to endorse one religion or denomination over another and persecute other churches.

Here's another part of PragerU's argument: The country used to be one way. Now it's another. And that's bad.

Jefferson also said, "to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions: a very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an Oligarchy."

Speration of church and state does not mean the separation of God from society.

As a professor, he should have noticed that his graph made absolutely no sense.

This is a highly misleading video (shocking from PragerU, I know). The Supreme Court had already cited the term "separation of church and state" from Jefferson's letter (which was talking about the First Amendment anyway) in 1878, 69 years before the Everson v. Board of Ed case which this video says was the first resurrection of it. And even if the term isn't in the Constitution, it still applies since the First Amendment says no official religion can be established.

This is so bad. Separating church and state is a good idea. The state lead by the majority religion is dangerous.

Can you guys just say you want a theocracy, because you aren't subtle.

That’s quite a Stretch to blame those 6 things on one Supreme Court decision

Simple answer: We are NOT A THEOCRACY.

I love how even your supporters are saying this is a dumb take.

TLDR; America is a constitutional republic, not a theocracy, and it needs to stay that way.

We should want marriage to be separated from Government.

So you believe churches should pay taxes. Me too.

I don't mind schools making a prayer time, but I do mind when it is mandatory or prohibited. It should be optional.

This video is proposing an attack on our basic freedoms. It is proposing that the government should force religion on those who don't want it. That "generic" prayer is a creed that some in school believe, and some don't. It hurts to be forced to say a creed you don't believe in. Would you want to be forced to declare your dependency on Lord Vishnu? No, because you don't believe that. In the same way, why should others be forced to declare their dependency on a monotheistic god? Freedom for all is clearly more moral than theocracy, so why do you want to force your belief system, which is not based on evidence or facts, onto the rest of us?

There’s a little thing called the anti-establishment clause in the first amendment of the constitution. Read it.

I like that “especially religions based on the Bible” part because they thought Muslims were nuts.

i normally like and agree with these videos but this one made some pretty big assumptions. Religion should not influence our day-to-day lives unless we choose to, it's our right to practice (or not practice) whatever religion we please.

Oh come on, really? This is a country of freedom, so why try to forcibly impose things that have a religious undertone? If people aren't religious, don't force them to be, and if people are religious, they can be religious in areas that are not governentally run. You guys sound ridiculous.

The prayer addressed in _Engel_ was not generic enough, for some; it presupposed that the speaker was an Abrahamic theist.

I love that the comments are more in touch with reality than PragerU

“The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” - John Adams

Does separation of church and state place any limitations on religion at all?

oh man.. keep having to dislike the videos when you try to involve more religion in rational governmental issues.. Forcing god and/or prayers on everyone and including beliefs into rational decisions is the first step backwards. I mean everyone CAN pray for and believe in whatever they want but there are very obvious reasons why state and religion are and should be seperated (just look over to your mentioned europe in the 1600s and earlier) Besides not believing in the same thing as everyone else doesn't make you loose morality! Or at least I have never found any evidence saying otherwise..

Lol, after reading the comments, I have to ask: who is ‘liking’ this video?

Public school-sanctioned prayer to an "almighty god" is clearly wrong. It excludes atheists and polytheists. No libertarian should be okay with government beareaucrats telling our children how to pray, even if you happen to agree with their choice of religion.

You can separate State from Church, but not the People of their Faith.

“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion” - John Adams

If you don’t have separation of church and state, you eventually having the state telling us which religions matter. I can guarantee you that Christians who are in favor of breaking the separation of church and state would complain profusely if Buddhism or other non-Christian religions became a promoted religion in the United States. Let’s not kid ourselves. That’s why the separation of church and state is so important.

“One vote... One court... One sentence... One Letter...” Minus the fact that the Everson decision referred both the first amendment and the fourteenth amendment.

If you use "the bible said so" in your argument you already lost

Religion is a private matter. That the state should not be involved in at all

I’m Christian but there is a reason why our Founding Fathers specifically made that a part of our constitution. **looks at Saudi Arabia**

Dear Prof. John Eastman/Prager University, I recognize that you are trying to prove a point, however, there were a few things I want to point out and questions to ask. For instance there was your statement were you claimed that without an all powerful and omi deity present deity social order would collapse when you said, “Almost every cultural and ethical indicator-marriage rates, birthrates, the number of Americans giving to charity-has declined since God and religion have faded from American life. Meanwhile, children without fathers in their lives, behavioral problems in schools, and crime have gone up dramatically.” (Eastman) First your I want to take a look statement about the relations of crime rates and a lack of (religious faith). I have found that faith is not a determining factor in the good and helpful behavior of the person. For instance, according to the Conversion.com, In a classical experiment known as the “Good Samaritan Study,” researchers monitored who would stop to help an injured person lying in an alley. They found that religiosity played no role in helping behavior, even when participants were on their way to deliver a talk on the parable of the good Samaritan.” (Xygalatas) This means in you have an equal chance of being helped by someone with no religious affliction and someone who does. To top it all off the article also stated that, “Although statistics show that atheists commit fewer crimes than average.” (Xygalatas) Second, I want to take another look at your statement about less Americans giving to charity because of having no religious or spiritual affiliation. Turns out there are multiple factors that goes into why people are willing to donate to charity and not just the faith of the person. Where according to Psychology Today, the factors include trust in the organization, altruism (expressing the importance of helping others), Social (giving because of someone you know and care about), Taxes (because donations are tax deductible), Egoism (expectation of something in return) and how much can the individual afford to give money to a charity. I also have a few questions what are your statistics that say that having no beliefs in the existence of a higher/lower power or not praying to such deity is linked to increase behavioral problems at school? How is not believing in god(s) or not praying to god(s) linked to increases number of children growing up without a father? I also want to take a look at your statement about the School Prayer when you said, “Listen to the words of that school prayer: “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen. The prayer was not specific to Christianity or any religion.” (Eastman) I found the reasoning behind the Supreme Court decision to end School Prayer according to constitution center.org, “ The reasoning in Engel was also applied in Schempp, in which the Court struck down a Pennsylvania policy that required all students to read 10 Bible verses and say the Lord’s Prayer at the beginning of each day. While a student could get an exemption with a parent’s note, the Warren Court decided that this still amounted to an unconstitutional government endorsement of a particular religious tradition.” Sincerely, Connor Compton Sources used for research. Stahl, Jonathan. “10 important Supreme Court cases about education” Constitution Center.org, Constitution Daily, 30th of October, 2015, constitutioncenter.org/blog/10-important-supreme-court-cases-about-education/. Konrath, Sara. “Six Reasons Why People Give Their Money Away, or Not.” Psychology Today.com, Psychology Today, 26th of November, 2017, www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-empathy-gap/201711/six-reasons-why-people-give-their-money-away-or-not. Dimitris, Xygalatas. “Are religious people more moral?” The Conversation.com, The Conversation US Inc, 23rd of October, 2017, theconversation.com/are-religious-people-more-moral-84560. Bias Check of Sources used for research. Van Zandt, Dave. “The Conversation” Media Bias Fact Check, Media Bias Fact Check, LLC, 10th of July, 2016, mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-conversation/. Van Zandt, Dave. “Psychology Today” Media Bias Fact Check, Media Bias Fact Check, LLC, 2nd of December, 2016, mediabiasfactcheck.com/psychology-today/. Van Zandt, Dave. “Constitution Daily” Media Bias Fact Check, Media Bias Fact Check, LLC, 13th of April, 2018, mediabiasfactcheck.com/constitution-daily/. Source found with Right-Wing Bias with low factual reporting. Van Zandt, Dave. “PragerU.” Media Bias/Fact Check, Media Bias Fact Check, March, 21st 2019, mediabiasfactcheck.com/prageru/.

"Almighty God" implies there is only one God, therefore ruling out polytheic religions

PragerU: We stand against opression and for the the freedom! Also pragerU:

There is NO evidence to justify that all the statistics he randomly spewed at the end, is causes by the seperation of church and state. Even if his incredibly arbitrary “statistics” is correct, Correlation is NOT causation. This video is either incredibly lazy, or, more likely just dishonest

It's fascinating seeing men and women who don't necessarily believe in any religion, to support it. I'm so used to the opposite from the internet. It's great that so many people can identify that even if you don't believe in a higher power, you can believe in the religion's teachings to be a good person.

PrageU: Now simping for theocracy.

"Separation of Church and State: There is no such phrase in the constitution." Uhm yeah but it became established in our Bill of Rights' First Amendment. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." If we're gonna be pedantic, you know what other word isn't in the Constitution? "God" or "Allah" or "Yahweh" "The founding Fathers never intended for Church and State to be separate." Well as we'll get into later, at least one of them believed that to be the case. Thomas Jefferson. But even if they didn't, who cares? Why are you deifying people as those whose words can never be questioned? Most of the founding fathers were also slavers! Should we not have questioned them on that either and not ratified the 14th Amendment? "They saw religion, specifically religions based on the bible as indispensable to the moral foundation of the nation they were creating." Citation needed. "It comes from one brief letter... at the end of a very long sentence." Pfft. "...building a wall of separation between church and state." Oh don't worry I'll complete this quote for you: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not options, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state." Man it sure sounds like Jefferson, a founding father, pretty conclusively believed in separation of church and state. Though I am in the admittedly poor position of taking him at his word rather than trying to twist them. "And that's where it lay undisturbed..." Until they lifted almost those exact words in Thomas Jefferson's letter to pen the First Amendment in *checks notes* 14 years earlier! So it seems like his letter to this Danbury Baptist Association was to describe what the intent was with the First Amendment. Man why is it that when anyone does even the smallest bit of research into your claims, it turns out you're lying liars who lie. "When James Madison first proposed what eventually became the first Amendment, the original wording was 'No Religion shall be established by Congress.'" But that language was later modified when it was pointed out that this might be taken to mean that the government, including the state government had no interest in religion at all." Ah yes, that problem was solved with the alternative wording, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." You can just feel the interest government has in religion radiating from this. And while it's true that originally this only applied to Congress, that all changed with the 14th Amendment, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." "The Founders did not want this." At least one of the founders wanted this. But hey there I go just going off what he LITERALLY SAID instead of putting words in their dead mouths like some kind of necromantic puppeteer. "George Washington said in his farewell address 'Religion and Morality are indispensable supports of our political prosperity." This does not that the government therefore 'ought' to support religions with taxpayers money. "Washington's view remained the nations view throughout the 19th century and into the 20th." Citation needed. "For the first time in American History, the First Amendment was not only about not prohibition of establishing a national religion, it was also about not giving any encouragement to any religion." Yeah for the first time.... except for when the 14th Amendment got passed, upon which the Everson case was based. 1868 to 1947, man legislation at the speed of government. "The modern strict separation view was born." No it was born in Thomas Jefferson's letter in 1802 and arguably in the bill of rights in 1789. "Where did the 5 justices look for support for their argument? Not the constitution, because there was nothing in the constitution to help them." Except for the 1st and 14th Amendment you liars! "How ironic that the author of the declaration of independence, which recognizes the proposition that human beings have inalienable rights from their creator and not from government was now being used to separate religion from the public square." Yeah if you don't know what irony, creator, or public square means you could say all those things. Thomas Jefferson wasn't used, it was the 1st and 14th Amendment. You'll also notice it says endowed by "their creator" not any specific God. That was specifically worded so that no religion was left out. (I mean it still leaves out non-deistic religion but whatever) How does the verse go, give to Caesar what is Caesar's. Give to God what is God's. Church gets as much worship and faith as it can stand but it'll never see one red cent of taxpayers money in this country and that's how it's going to stay. Lastly, it wasn't separating it from the public square, it was separating it from government! "For Jefferson and the other founders, religion was central to the entire American Project." If by American Project, you mean the government, then no Jefferson didn't believe that according to his own words! "The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are just two examples where government acknowledges its debt to God." By never ONCE mentioning him. "William O. Douglas quote." I don't care you've probably taken him out of context anyway. But to presuppose a supreme being does not then mean the government should support the worship of any specific one. "A generic school prayer violated the courts -new- definition of the first Amendment." Good! Keep your religion out of our schools, you creep. If I want to send my hypothetical children to school I want to make sure they're not being indoctrinated by being coerced into a morning prayer. Keep religion in your churches. "The prayer was not specific to Christianity..." Except it mentions God so no Buddhism, and it says Amen so no Islam. I call bullcrap. "Are we a better society for it (separating church and state)?" No because we're not enforcing it. I had to say the Pledge of Allegiance every day in school. So great job. It didn't stick. But if we were, then yeah we would be. No dogma. No injecting of confusion in children. No terrifying of children because they can't seem to escape religion wherever they go. Less deification of the founding fathers. I could go on. "It's hard to argue that we are." Oh yes those examples off the top of my head were very hard to come up with. "Almost every cultural and ethical indicator." Marriage and birth rates is an ethical/cultural indicator? In what universe are you living? Well hey you know what else is down? Divorce rates! I don't look at that as an ethical indicator but your religion sure does. But you don't mention it because it doesn't support your claim that "AMERICA IS UNDER ATTACK! PANIC! PANIC! PANIC!" Get out of here. And have ya maybe considered that giving to charity has gone down because the rich took all the money and now we're just vying for scraps here! We have more Americans living at or below the poverty line than at any other time in History meanwhile people like Bill and Melinda gates have like $35 billion and are like we haven't physically disturbed the poor enough, so let's go ahead and take that Oxford vaccine that was going to be given out for free and coerce them to sell the rights to it to AstraZeneca who have no compunctions of making it free. But hey it's just human lives right? How's that for an ethical indicator. "Children without fathers..." Many of whom are forced away from their families because of the religious right's "war on drugs." "Behavioral problems in schools..." Which have gone up because on average a teacher is charged with more students because we're not funding our schools properly. "Crime..." Nope. That one's just a lie. Though our coverage of every crime that happens has gone up thanks to the cancerous 24 news cycle. "And all because of..." THE CONSTITUTION! "I'm John Eastman a..." clown. You're a clown, and a propagandist.

"the First Amendment was not only about the prohibition of establishing a national religion, it was also about not giving any encouragement to any religion." Which can only be done through separating religion from the state where officials can enact policies.

This is gonna be interesting

End the separation of church and state so the state can put restrictions on your religion,got it.Way to be “small government” Prager U

"The United States was going to be different. Americans would be free to follow the religion of their choice." And that is protected through government officials not having bias towards a given religion, which would directly impact their policies.

When is PragerU going to stop making videos with weakly formed arguments where the vast majority of the evidence is just the presenter telling you that its true. When are you going to stop using bogus useless graphs with no citation or any relevant information (such as labels?! Numbers? I mean, please take some remedial 5th grade classes on how to make a graph). Is this really the best you can do in arguing for a point? These things are why PragerU is not respected as a reliable source of information and is recognized as the propaganda machine that it is. Heres some examples (non exhaustive) of how this video is weak in its argument: -Fails to recognize any counter arguments -Merely states that the supreme courts decision wasn’t based on the amendment instead of providing evidence for that being the case -Assumes the passing of these laws led to a decrease in religion -Assumes a decrease in religion is the cause for a decrease in morality -Uses an extremely problematic method for determining morality -“morality” graph has no numbers, no source, and no dates, making it essentially useless The way morality is determined especially riles me up, as some of the things listed either have nothing to do with morality, or have more than one cause than just morality. In what way are marriage rates and decreased birth rates tied to morality?! Are people with five kids more moral than people with two kids? Plus decreasing birthrates is more tied to a post-industrial society, this is well known. The inclusion of marriage rates and birth rates is an inherently religion centric view of morality. This overly simplistic view also ignores key events such as the civil rights movement, which I would say is much more important for morality than how many times a woman gets pregnant and has a child. I feel deeply sorry for any child whose parents make them watch this drivel, their critical thinking skills will be worse off for it.

So, if we consider the preyer “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon thee, and we beg thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen”. How would it include religions with many gods (e.g. Hinduism) or with no god (e.g. Buddhism)?

So basically they're arguing against separation of church and state but don't have the balls to say it clearly.

Church and State should be completely separate. Period.

If you want both together. Then you must tolerate and defend a child wanting to pray to Satan. If a child prays to Cthulu, Thanos or Satan in school, nobody has the right to tell them who to pray to. It is their right and not yours. You have the right to pray to a Jewish Zombie or a warlord prophet and no one should get involved. If you violate someone right to pray to satan then they have the right to do that to you.

4:02 "Following Everson, the nation's moral infrastructure began to crack" Bold words, because you seem to imply that the nation was morally better before 1947. Need I remind you that before this, Americans practiced slavery? Need I remind you that before this, Americans forcefully took land from Native Americans? Need I remind you that this happened before the Civil Rights movement? Which means that before this, racism was still institutionalized, segregation was still very much practiced and mixed race marriage was illegal in a lot of states? Are you saying that America was morally superior when all these things are still in practice?

Just wanted to say Happy Memorial Day to everyone! 🇺🇸

"The Prayer was not specific to any religion." "Amen" is literally only used in Abrahamic religions.

One thing we as Americans have forgotten that was common knowledge until after the Civil War, is that the Court does not make laws. The court interprets laws and gives their OPINION, their word is not final. Praying in public schools is not illegal, it is just contrary to the OPINION of the court. Pastors speaking on politics is not illegal, it is just contrary to the OPINION of the court.

it doesn't matter, the church and state should be separated anyway

Religion should never be associated with the state

As soon as church and state get mixed, is when you have only one sect of Christianity being endorsed and the others shunned, just like the church of England and contholicism and other similar incidents

"We are a religious people, whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being." But you represent a nation that seeks to allow individuals to freely follow their beliefs, regardless of if they are your own.

We’re better off with the separation.

Love your stuff PragerU, but when you turn to religious matters your objectivity becomes questionable. Separation of church and state is a good idea.

Shame we can't build a wall of separation between the State and economics. It's just as essential and moral.

“Children without fathers, behavior problems in school, and crime have all gone up dramatically all because of one vote.” I’m sorry but I really don’t think you can prove a link between these two things. Correlation does not imply causation.

So professor, please explain the reasons for our moral and ethical dilemmas (i.e. organized crime, alcohol abuse, slavery, explotation of the poor, etc.) that occurred before this court case in 1962? 🤔🤔🤔

All this and yet California has been fining Christian churches who refuse to wed gay couples. How is that legal.

Freedom of religion is like free speech. You’re free to exercise that right until you begin infringing on the rights of others by, say, teaching creationism or praying in a public school, or discriminating against LGBTQ+ people. Public facilities must be religiously neutral, including non-religious people. Your religious rights end at the religious and civil rights of others.

Thomas is right religion should play no part in politics

Before primeire: *comment section explaining separation of church and state* PragerU after primeire: “it doesn’t exist”

legally atheism is recognized as a religious conviction, in that the government cannot enact laws against it. additionally, not all religions are monotheistic. finally, children should not be forced to pray in schools if their families do not want them to.

"Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" Religion and state should always be separate.

ah yes, because marriage rates are totally a way of measuring morality in a nation.

The first amendment clearly defends separation of church and state

Yeah, no. Keep the church and the state seperate.

I generally like PragerU videos, but this is just nonsense. If religion should be, according to Thomas Jefferson, a private matter, then, by definition, a state giving money to churches is a violation of that principle, and so is forcing children to pray at schools.

This guy thinks that separation of church and state means seperation of church and public life

I am a conservative but this is such a sheer propaganda that i'd soon prefer not to be affiliated with any side

"They saw religion-specifically religions based on the Bible-as indispensable to the moral foundation of the nation they were creating." Except the Bill of Rights introduced freedom of religion to the Constitution, which is supposed to be insured through the government not giving any religions heightened treatment.

Factually inaccurate

In all of mankind's history. There has never been more damage done than by one person who thought they were doing the right thing.

My take-away is...that separation of church and state is a "thing" to protect churches and religions from government control. But, it's not meant to keep religion out of government.

It is really surprising the same PragerU that talks about so many sensible things such as Free Market Capitalism with such fantastic logic and data also professes the most non-sensical and stupid ideas like religion and judeo-christianity. When christianity and church dominated state affairs and reigned over people's lives in medieval times, Europe was in dark ages, inquisitions were burning dissendants alive and most of western population lived in abject poverty. It was only post renaissance, when people moved away from Bible and searched for truth in laboratories, scientific growth came about paving way to industrial revolution. And morality is the farthest thing when it comes to Bible. There are countless verses in both Old and New Testament which are not just immoral but despicable by any standards of human sensitivity. God of the book has nothing to do with the god of the nature.

We don’t necessarily need religious values to teach us how to be good people, we just need to be less selfish. I’m saying I’m against religious values but since when is the decline in marriage rates a moral issue?

Also a good deal of the founding fathers were deists (who believed in a prime mover who started the universe but played no part in it once it was going) and atheists.

Anything related to god. Everyone: ... Prager u: AthEIst BAd

It basically outlaws a theocracy. It doesn’t outlaw christian values in the government.

You can almost see his disdain for atheist/agnostic culture. I thought this was gonna turn into a sermon about halfway through. People are entitled to their beliefs no matter what they are. And say what you want about government, but in this country you are allowed to believe in anything

"Separation of church and state" is in the First Amendment. It's right there next to "religious liberty."

"Hard cases make bad law." Apparently the Supreme Court doesn't care.

This is going to be another controversial one

There is, and should be separation of church and state. I guess it's time to start taxing churches like if they're businesses.

You DO know that the countries with the best social systems, the best educational systems and the lowest crime rate are secular (e. g. Scandinavia)? STOP LYING!!!

Europe needs a Seperation of Mosque and State

The phrase "congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" doesn't just mean congress won't establish a state church but means congress shall make "NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION". The text is pretty clear " no law". You can't favor one religion over another. And yes forcing kids to say a prayer in school is also a violation of the first amendment.

I don't think Thomas Jefferson was talking just about freedom OF religion, but also freedom FROM religion. A very important distinction.

Seperation of PragerU from RU-vid

If churches want a say on government policies, start paying taxes!

Didn't know PragerU wanted to live in Iran.