“I didn’t bring my Constitution with me. Fortunately, senators don’t have to memorize the Constitution,”
Christine O’Donnell, Delaware’s Republican Senate nominee, declared at the forum, held in the moot courtroom of Widener University.
Ms. O’Donnell attacked her Democratic opponent,
Chris Coons, for insisting that public schools teach evolution but not “intelligent design,” which posits that life forms are too complex to have evolved through natural processes and must have been created by a conscious being such as God. Mr. Coons, the New Castle County executive, said that public schools could not teach intelligent design or similar theories, like creationism and creation science, because they were “religious doctrine” rather than science.
“That is a blatant violation of our Constitution,” Ms. O’Donnell said. “The Supreme Court has always said it is up to the local communities to decide their standards.”
That’s generally true–except when it comes to teaching religion-based nonscientific theories of human origin. In 1968, the high court
struck down an Arkansas law prohibiting instruction in evolution. In 1987, the court
invalidated a Louisiana statute requiring that “creation science,” an antecedent to intelligent design, be taught alongside evolution.
Ms. O’Donnell likened Mr. Coons’s position on evolution to those of “our so-called leaders in Washington” who have rejected the “indispensible principles of our founding.”
When Mr. Coons interjected that “one of those indispensible principles is the separation of church and state,” Ms. O’Donnell demanded, “Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?”
The audience exploded in laughter.
The Bill of Rights begins with the command, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” but it doesn’t specifically use the words “separation of church and state.”
In 1802, however, President Thomas Jefferson used the metaphor to explain the framers’ purpose, and courts since have followed his guidance.
The moderator moved on, but Ms. O’Donnell later returned to this question, demanding of Mr. Coons, “So you’re telling me the phrase, ‘the separation of church and state,’ is found in the Constitution.”
Mr. Coons began reciting the Establishment Clause, as it is known, prompting Ms. O’Donnell to ask, “That’s in the First Amendment?”
After the debate, an O’Donnell campaign spokesman said his candidate “simply made the point that the phrase appears nowhere in the Constitution.”
Coons campaign spokesman Daniel McElhatton said, “It is clear that Ms. O’Donnell does not believe in the separation of church and state, something the framers believed in so strongly that they made it the very first amendment.”
Ms. O’Donnell’s unfamiliarity with the Constitution extended beyond the First Amendment, when she was asked her view of tea party proposals to repeal some or all of the 14th, 16th and 17th amendments.
She said she would retain the 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913 to make U.S. senator an elected position, rather than appointed by state legislatures.
“Can you remind me of what the other ones are?” she asked.