us now. he is president of americans united for the separation of church and state. it is a book that touches on your writings, old and new including this new 2002 speech on page 61 in which you said -- i do not think the religious right understands that religions do best where governments do -- i included it to kiev anything had changed dramatically from that time to now. it turns out that it has not. i really think that the religious right does not understand something fundamental. they do not understand that the history of this country really demonstrate that government works best and religion works best when you keep a deep it -- a decent distance between both. government should accept the claims of religion unless they

against the constitutional rights of others. we are better off when we keep that distance. i said it in video to and i say this bill true today. >> who is the religious right today and is it different from 25 years ago? fundamentally it is not. it is a 1% of the american electorate. 21% of the american electorate. it is a powerful interest group and voting block particularly in republican primaries. >> what about specific interest groups, politicians? are they more religious? >> i don't think they are more religious that they talk about religion more. even in the 1950's, politicians tended not to discuss their personal religious matters but now we find out, recently,

donald trump's favorite book is the bible. hillary clinton a the same answer some months ago. her favorite book is the bible. i think this is indicative of how important it is for politicians to think that they are communicating with people by saying -- i am godly and i can prove it because i read the bible. other presidents have tried to prove it. first tried to prove his favorite bible verse 6:13.hn six burst -- he messed it up and other people, howard dean, got in a lot of trouble by not being able to figure out what the bible is about. to make sureant that any religious voters on their side no that those candidates are just like them. hardmocrats are working

not to get too hard behind on the jesus momentum. >> it is true. that is amething bipartisan problem in american politics. --nkly, what you should do something like bill bradley when he was running for the senate and then when he had that aborted run for the presidency, he was asked all the time about his religion. he said this is a political campaign. i do not choose to discuss my personal, religious police. if youk if you do but can't or in your explanation of those things, then i think you are making a big mistake. megyn kelly during the debate on 17 -- the 1016 or people that were there on that part of the debate, she asked about god. i got a lot of notes and complaints from people. i like it when people say -- so what you think about god? the folks that night did not

give clear answers but they have in the past. john kasich told meet the press in april when asked -- how will you decide whether to run for president? he said i will let the lord lead me and tell me what i should do with the rest of my life. he is now running for president so i guess he got the word or thinks he got the word. god wants him to run. ben carson said when he decided to run, he said the fingers of god -- i am not sure what that meant. run it meant to him was to and i will be the next president. it goes on and on and on. if you have four or five people who say in one political party that god wants you to be the next president, there has clearly been a failure to mitigate or understand with communication was, because they cannot all be right. republicans, democrats,

independents, we have lines for you to weigh in. the book god and government: twenty-five years of fighting for equality, secularism, and freedom of conscience, the reverend barry lynn. how often are people surprised to learn you are a reverend? guest: frequently. but they also are surprised that i fight for secularism. but there are two kinds of secularism. there are atheists to believe there is no god, and and there are theists who believe that whatever you think about the god question, the existence of purpose and the university with these kind of russians we should debate them in appropriate, but we havew as i said, about 25 more years to save the first amendment. a clear separation between church and state. host: how did you get into this work? guest: what i discovered, after

working in civil rights and working against the war in vietnam, i had a conversation with one of my roommates in tolege who said he was going london for spring break. fun buthat sounds like he said it was not because they had to go to london to get an abortion. prior to roe versus wade. but he said it is too dangerous here. it was eye-opening for me. the powerful religious interest of the time, the roman catholics especially, and such control that they could tell when they were permitted to do and not permitted to do with their own bodily integrity. it was a shock to me. i had a lot to learn. i did learn a lot. most of my life has been devoted to the protections of the first amendment.

can find out about that in your book. let's start with judy on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. i very respectfully disagree with the reverend. our country came out of the magna carta. we were on a judeo-christian system. murder was murder, adultery was adultery, etc. the danger with a separately -- separate slope is that we got roe v wade, and now we are marriage that the supreme court is legislating. and i would submit to you, as much as i do not supported from a religious stand work, gatekeeper -- gay people marrying does not kill people,

abortion does. i want to know how we got so far out of whatewed up most of us would consider outright murder. guest: the idea that the magna carta was a direct connector to historicallyion is incorrect. it is like the mayflower compact and the other things of the religious right. i think they are fundamentally wrong about that. when you set up the constitution, it was article three, no religious test for public office. this veryssed it with directive that congress should make no law was acting

religion or the establishment thereof. apply the billto of rights to the states. this new interest in the 14th amendment on the part of the candidates, maybe they should look at what their own party thought the 14th amendment meant at the time of its ratification. host: let's go to james, in rochester, michigan. it were up next. good morning. my comment is actually a reference to your previous guest who said very rarely a couple of times that he feels, or his opinion is such that the united states was founded solely on judeo-christian principles. i want to prequalify my question with the understanding that i'm a catholic. disagree that somehow religion played a role in the founding of the united states, but to solely separate judeo-christian principles and the only basis really rubs me the wrong way, because it marginalizes other religions and other at the cities. i would like to get your guest

comment on that. guest: you're absolutely right. there were people who were practitioners of religion, even of the fairly conservative christianity, but the real framers of the constitution, wanted to make clear that this country was not to be considered founded on the christian faith. fact, one of the early congresses, something was passed called the treaty after believed to deal with the barbary pirate incidents. the senate unanimously passed in the treatynd it says this nation was in no way founded on the christian faith. i am not sure you could get a treaty with that language in the past the current senate, but you could then. it is symptomatic of just how clear the framers were that they wanted nothing to do with

defining the government as having something to do with religion. thomas jefferson, for example, was asked repeatedly to sign days of prayers and thanksgiving. he rejected those. now they are routinely pass, routinely supported by president s. thein the days of old, in good old conservative days, they did not find that easy to get even some statement like that approved. jefferson, madison, these people were not interested in having the government help you be profoundly religious and they could -- believed you could do that yourself. host: talk about what happened after september 11, and your sons school, the title that chapter, in times of trouble the watchdogs have to work even louder. jesse jackson showed up at my son's school and gave a speech. and of course he is jesse jackson, a famous person, and

they said sure. he used a lot of bible passages, and he did a lot of praying, and one of my sons friends who said he was hindu said can he do that? can't.aid of course he and i called the school, and other parents called the school, and they admitted it was a mistake that there is no emergency exception to the first amendment. it got even worse. 9/11, a sequence shot outside of a gas station, because beside turbine and thought he must be a terrorist. caller: good morning, my question is, the universities, schools are, the

all pushing islam on the history books. fathers, a lot of our heroes of the past, they are all being demonized. commandments, they are putting of this horrific statue beside the 10 commandments resembling the devil. how can they push islam on our at these public schools, which pay taxes for, and not allow prior -- prayer? guest: it is a good question.

numberas pushing islam, one, i do not think that you can find many high school text books that we should in the sense that they are saying this is the one true faith, something we did when we had mandatory prayer of a christian nature in public schools until the early 1960's. this idea that the textbooks have somehow been excising the founding fathers, emphasizing islam, i think this is empirically not true. but i do want to say that wins will go overboard and try to promote islam, americans united is one of the few groups that is actually out there saying wait a minute, you cannot do that either. years ago,ia a few there was an effort to have young people in a high school memorized islamic prayers from the koran. we of course, hit the ceiling. imagine if someone had gone back and said to young people, do not forget, memorized and prayer from the christian new

testament. everybody would have objected. there was a little concerned when maybe we should not do this, but for us it is clear, you have to be a hundred percent in favor of a rentable, separation of church and state, mosque in state, temple and state, and i'm proud that we did that. in reference to the 10 commandments monuments and the satanic image, this was because this is an open forum. this was opened by the state of for everybody. it was government property, they decided that the 10 commandments monuments there, and then a group all the satanic temple, which is actually not satan worshipers, they wanted to make a point in the point was important. if your code to open this for everyone coming up to open it to us. that is what has happened out there. would you prefer that teachers across the country ignore the role of religion in the history of the world? guest: it is important in both history and literature

classes to bring up the bible literatureeligious when it is relevant to the conversation pretty cannot talk about anything good, bad, or ugly unless you talk about religion. fafnir, you have to know who absalom is. there are lots of religious references in literature a. host: what is appropriate use? guest: when you have reference or somebible verse bible connection from any great southern writer, and you say this comes from the christian bible, that is ok. when youbles me is have a whole course adjustment bible. there are plenty of people promoting it under the theory read shakespeare

or literature without knowing about the bible. but you do not have to have a class making it being the most important religion in the country. we are a very diverse country now. we were always diverse, but never quite this diverse. wine for democrats, mitchell, good morning. caller: perception, i would think, would be the key word. bad sales ande promotions breaking of the religious right, you have the conservatives coming of the rockefeller type, you have tea arty types, you have the forecrat, you have the abortion, not abortion, your feet from -- you have the donald trump types. these young people are looking at their grandparents

great-grandparents plan that hypocrisy, and just because things change, the change of times tells me that these young people are going to continue to want to have separation of church and state because it keeps teens and we have to think positive for the good of the country. so those hypocrites, i think toy cut their own knows spite their face. you have young people who are going to see it differently. but i believe what we're going to do is move forward versus all of that hypocrisy which caused this country so much hate and so much grief. we are reaping what we sow. guest: you're absolutely right. we are reaping what we sow. i have been to religious right conferences, many of what i talked about in the book. when you see the parents of some of these evangelical young people, and here the polling daily from their own pollsters.

and they find out that even before the supreme court decision on marriage equality that 44% of millennial's, 2230-year-old young people in fact the or did it even before these records did. when this kind of data comes out, with evidence for evolution support it is like being pollsters are the scope -- skunk at the picnic. it is not catching on with their very own children. that makes them horrified. it starts to get them more involved in two getting the government into the business, instead of saying we did something wrong by providing certain things, including for many evangelical millennial's a sense of hatred. they just think their parents and grandparents hate gay people.

that is not a trajectory for the future. that is for the past. host: as an ordained minister, you mistakenly get invited to some of these. sometimes i get invited, sometimes i just sign up and then people want to take pictures of eight. the interesting thing, i was on an elevator at one of the family research council meetings that are held in washington every october, and a woman came on the elevator with me. she said barry lynn? i said yes. she said i want to take a picture when he's lucky to get the girls at church. i said i am happy to do that, i do not charge. maybe i shouold. -- maybe i should. caller: before i asked my question, i need to get some clarification from your guest about, is he a christian minister? the united church

of christ. caller: that means you are a follower of jesus christ? guest: that is correct. minister, that is a leadership role. you are there to minister to the people and guide them in what christianity is. christian, is, as a do you believe that abortion is ok? do you think it is ok for a an abortion under any circumstances? do think that abortion is a moral prerogative of each , atvidual, every individual any time in her pregnancy. is ar: i do not ask if it prerogative, and asking if you as a person believes that abortion is ok to take the life of an innocent baby in the womb? do you believe that is ok?

that that baby has no rights, has no right to life, and that it is ok to have that life of the baby? do you think that is ok, as a minister? guest: i do not think it is a baby. we are talking about a nascent life, a possible life and we're not talking about a fully human life. not only do i believe that, the early church believed that, and human thing sense of worship was known in bible times, that jesus might have made a comment about this if it had been that important to him. he did not. the only thing we know for sure from the jewish and christian scriptures is that abortion is not the equivalent of murder, because the penalties imposed in ancient israel were different for the two acts. that is all we know. host: one more follow-up? caller: i believe that he is very misguided. i do not believe he deserves to have the right is a reverent or

minister, because he is not clearly following the teachings of jesus christ. i would ask him right now as he is sitting there, and this is a hypothetical, but if jesus christ were to have a seat at the table with him, and he could look at jesus and say that is not really a human being, we do not know what that is . i believe this is all about him. i believe he is a charlatan. i believe it is about him trying to get payment fortune for himself. anybody could take that title would believe that jesus christ would accept that taking the life of innocent human being is ok. it is not ok. if jesus were here, i am sure we would have a conversation, and i would give them exactly the same answer that i give to you. it is not just me, there are all religious organizations and religious leaders in many denominations and many of those 2000 religions that i mentioned

exist in the united date such would agree with my view of this. jesus did not mention abortion, he could have. he mentioned a lot of other things there is no recorded evidence that he said a word about this topic. host: i question about something that happens nearly every day .hen the houses and session why do you allow everyday commerce to begin with a prayer? i might have been making some progress on this, outside of the courtroom, when republicans took over the congress and newt gingrich became the speaker of the house. bob livingston was a major player at that time from louisiana. radio showbeing on a with livingston, and i said you are cutting all these programs. you are cutting the number of elevator operators, what about

the chaplain? it is costing about $350,000 a year at that time. he said he would think about that. it's got a lot of attention. newt gingrich came in and told the new york times a few weeks later that we have abandoned that possibility. we are not going to use volunteer chaplains and of all denominations are all over capitol hill. they could have saved all that money. he said it would have looked bad for us if we did, it was like we are anti-religion. it would look like if you're pro-constitution if you use volunteers and use tax dollars on something other than christian prayers. unfortunately very few people have a technical understanding how to challenge practices like that. it continues to this day. my judgment, look at the

prayers, look at what they currently accomplished, as a legislative measure, and then tell me if this prayer works or if it does not. host: we have about a half hour left. if you want to call into a will put the phone numbers on the screen. jeffrey has been waiting in michigan on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a lot of respect for you. guest: thank you. i listened to the ones who called before. these kind of people are liars. how can you be a christian and you hate people? racist and call yourself pro-life?

christianity is about love and loving your fellow man. it is not about hate. we have all been babies. womb, andabies in the , those kinde born democrats lethe these people take over. we are liars, they are hypocrites. , my wife is not going to have 18 kids, but they want their wife to have 18 kids. protective of the unborn, they want to take away women's rights.

women's rights are private thing. host: you brought up a couple topics. i will let the reverend jump in. a so-calledis right, the right of fetuses to be bored, versus the right of women to make a choice and an important choice. their personal and dublin, or their integrity, for their future, for their employability. it would be nice if everything worked perfectly in this country. say,s barney frank used to the religious right tends to worry about life only from the moment of conception until the moment of earth. -- birth. momentso care about the of natural birth, which is why they are strongly opposed to any kind of intervention, even in circumstances in the famous case of terri schiavo, when you said you could not withdraw life-sustaining treatment, and many of us said that is not life

to begin with. they call it natural death, productive machines is ok to call natural death. control every minute from natural birth to conception to-- natural death. that is not consistent with our democracy. host: mary, good morning. caller: good morning. one of the undertones i am hearing here is a very fervent effort -- there is a difference , the freeeedom exercise of a person's religion and freedom from religion. i am hearing superhuman efforts for the freedom from religion. we are hearing that the bill of

rights gives us extremely wide latitude to exercise our religion. there'm hearing is that that itso much pushback is a constant struggle to that we were space afforded. we were not really afforded that by the bill of rights. the bill of rights is just a backstop, a guarantor of a ride right thattes that -- predates that. as far as i am concerned, religion should be given the most wide berth. the opposing side would have to blend over backwards to prove -- and over backwards to prove that that should be narrowed. guest: it is an interesting theory. but i do not agree with it, i do not think it is historically correct. the bill of rights is there for a nervous. the so-called original cost

fusion did not have a bill of rights, and there were people that said i might be willing to ratify this, but i sure would like a bill of rights. and freedom of religion, the freedom to be protected from the imposition of someone else's religion, and the free exercise clause are put in the first amendment in order to guarantee both. to freedom to practice your religion, i would assume you do not agree that religiouswith every belief has the right to practice it, because in some cases it has a very detrimental effect on someone else. so when in recent years there was a bill passed in congress or religious freedom restoration, i supported it the time. ted kennedy was a major supporter, and bill clinton signed it. we thought this was a guarantor of the things you are talking about. a prisoner was to wear long

hair because he is a native american, we thought this piece of legislation would help to guarantee the success of any lawsuit they would file, and it has. the problem is, in about a year ago, and a case called hobby lobby, five members of the supreme court said that even for-profit companies like hobby lobby, people who sell crafts and plague flamingo kits, which are not religious icons, those companies have the right to exercise religion. that is a preposterous idea. they were trying to exercise it by saying we will give you health insurance, you women employees, but we will not cover certain kinds of contraception. that is another example where modern evangelical millennial's disagree with their parents. there is overwhelming support for if you are a private company and you have insurance, you have

to cover contraception. waiting on our line for independents. good morning, you were on with the reverend barry lynn. caller: could you give me a usually call in about a topic, but i want to mention something about the 14 amendment. can come in and have citizenship by being born here. the black community and the poor white community are competing for jobs. jesse jackson was speaking bible verses. -e should have left - countries, go to saudi

to reach christianity and see what happens to you. you, would your marry a gay couple? i would. the united church of christ was one of the first religious denominations to agree and to provide assistance for people who wanted to perform same-sex weddings. we have been doing that historically, particularly in have ratified the-sex marriages before supreme court decision in june of this year. but going to saudi arabia is not an example that we ought to be holding up. saudi arabia has a miserable treatment of women, they have a miserable treatment of non-muslims and we all know that. we should be better than that. they should be a country that promotes the idea that when the diversity is real and it is

here, they need to celebrate it and not start curtailing it. the idea that if you do not like it, just leave, it sounds like a forgotten piece of our past involving race. we do not want to serve like people at this restaurant, but we do not mind you going next door. comfort level is not a constitutional standard. we should not be in the position of forcing people to make a leaving about classroom, leaving assembly, or leaving a restaurant because of the deal does not like what they say. host: jill is waiting on our -- joe is waiting on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. i'm a disabled be a veteran. prayer isagree that

taught in school, sunday school, not public school. in politics, when they bring religion, most of these politicians violate the ninth commandment of daring. in, and nobody says a word. they are ready a child factor, but what she is that child's they forget about her and do not take care of anything not that remind the the 1966 degree worth a force every woman to have at least five kids. practiceistian should what st. francis of us as he used to do, he said everywhere i go i preach the gospel will. sometimes i use words. the here at fort bragg in special operations.

god the on your endeavors and families, those of you who are serving our country. guest: amen to that. we represented these widows who during the administration of the bush administration to allow pagans to have their emblem of dstones alla over the country. going backg widows to the korean war, to the vietnam war, and to iraq and afghan and. -- afghanistan. he time the president thatot believe wiccans were a legitimate

religion. veteransd to sue the administration to get the amblin for atheists and humanists. we won, we did not even have to go to the full trial because the justice department said we cannot defend this position. once you give emblems of honor , whenryone but one group the one groups come calling, you have to give it to them as well. ist: one issue bring up politicking in churches. what crosses the line? west: the good news is, when complain about politicking in churches, we do not go in gray areas. if somebody stands up in a public and says vote pro-life, that is not our concern. things whereto

they say president obama is a baby killer and a gay lover, and then go one to explain why he could not vote for him. that was way over the line. incident where a pastor said on a sunday morning the people lebanon tuesday, if you need a ride to the holy life -- to the polling place, come to the church. we will take the church bus and we will drive you to the polling place. they were asked to they were asked to their record to vote for. if you haven't to say democrat, they said he cannot get on the bus. are so far over the line, and the basis for all this is a thatsion of the tax code says 501(c)(3) groups, or all aurches cannot endorse candidate for public office.

the time. this all we get dozens of complaints every year. there is a whole campaign to do this by religious rights group arizona. about six ago a federal judge says we have to change one sentence and the irs regulation in order to begin these investigations. ofis just naming the title the person who can start the audits based on these violations of law. six years have passed, they did rulemaking here in washington felt that offer polls and's and then hundreds of people write responses. later,d-a-half years there has been no change. there has not been in this administration, a single effort to investigate, much less panel lies in some way a group that has so clearly gone over the endorsing a candidate for office. host: why do you think there is

that? guest: because there are these organizations, these welfare organizations that have a slightly different tack exemption. it is very very what you're not supposed to do in a substantial amount of your work. the irserance is what calls it. you cannot endorse candidates at all with church resources. the famous story about the monkeys who were given and none -- who were given an infinite number of typewriters and would eventually type out shakespeare. this is five monkeys, five were processes in a room. this is not rocket science, this is not changing the health care system or favoring what to do with wars in the middle east, this is simple and has not been done. it is disgraceful. mark, on our line for

republicans. good morning. caller: i have two questions. number one, when in your religion do believe that a person or an individual has a soul? at what part of their life do they have a soul? i do not that in my religion any one person who is a person of that religion could give you an answer to that restaurant. to that question. i'm happy to make it possible for every woman to make her own moral judgment about two things, is there a soul their demand to what degree does the fact that there is a soul there means i should not obtain an abortion? that is what we would call hoice.ore c what you believe and putting what you believe into practice. i would never want to tell anybody when the soul was there, and when that means you

cannot have an abortion. host: do you have a second question? caller: i do. he seemed to be centering completely on conservative ministers. i think you're wrong on history. if it were up for the african-american churches, and their ability to organize themselves within the churches, that was their safety zone. that is where they were able to organize, and they organized politically. the civil rights move it, which has never been one of was, have d it not been the leadership of the black ministers throughout the south, and what you are now saying, you would think they would have enjoyed their tax-exempt status. free to goe righ ahead. guest: you're right about that. the same races for the african-american communities in

the 1960's were the churches. martin luther king jr. spoke a church, a synagogue, almost every day of his professional life. but his close confidence and friend john lewis who is now a member of congress and the state of georgia has told me and many that dr. king never endorsed a candidate for public office. that, because he insisted that was not the role of the church. he talked about issues, he talked about why he needed to pass the 1964 civil rights act of he understood those civil rights principles. no one is suggesting that any church, including the most conservative america cannot talk about issues. what they cannot do is endorse candidates for public office. host: jeremy, our line for democrats. caller: good morning.

the reality is christianity. christianity is reality. jesus christ is the spirit of life, saying is the spirit of death. it is a test. we are in the test. we all are. when you say what you say, as regards to abortion, you are correct in principle, however god is judge. likee not to judge, just you said about martin luther king. he was not a judge, he was a man, a spirit of life. the spirit of death took him. that battle's confusion. history never changes because the word never changes. man changes history, but he will not succeed. host: do you have a question? is, why doquestion

we keep speaking about religion babble?igion is guest: i hear you. i think a lot of people accept that idea. but i think we have to recognize that we are not alone as christians in this country. that we have these 2000 religions and all the believers are first-class citizens. if you're going to be living in this country, if you were a person in this country, you deserve to be treated just as well as anyone, including jesus christ as my savior believers. lot of babel, and there is no question about that. it comes from the right, left, the middle. but our quest nutrition says we have to make decisions based on the common they accepted principles of the constitution itself. a pretty good idea, freedom of

speech, equal protection of the law, these are the things that ought to matter. i've a book on my desk that is hundreds of pages long called politics according to the bible. this is a guy about how the operate,system is to what fighter jets we should buy. and frankly, i am not buying a lot of that. leverage his sermon, i do ask people do i think about something been -- something other than church and state separation? go into a closet and pray, do not be acrylic liquid -- tdo not be a hypocrite, because then my father will answer your prayers.

go back to the constitution, not --the rival passages that bible passages that support my beliefs. host: why are churches, synagogues, mosques, tax-exempt? nonbelievers are forced to pay taxes. isst: one of the realities if you take a property rich church in any of america's inner cities, and all the fun tax them, you would find that you do not have the income this late in the game, they would go broke. destroyed institution of the church. but if we were to start over, i do not see any reason to guarantee any tax exemption for every church and religiously affiliated hospital. but we have almost crossed the rubicon and it is a list too

late to go back without literally destroying lots of inner-city churches, to say nothing of small rural churches. host: enforcing the politicking issue. let's make sure that these churches do not get government funds or their programs. barack obama, when he was a candidate in 2008, said that george bush's faith-based initiative would have to be changed and he said i would not want to do away with it, the idea that you give money to churches to do good work, but he said he would get rid of the provision that says if you get government grants or contracts .ou have to employ anyone you cannot have a religious litmus test in order to hire someone. and a majority of people in the country thought that that was posture. but last week we organized a letter with civil rights groups theover washington asking

president to do what he has said he would do in 2008, and not give money to people who are basically religious they get. they will not hire you. barack obama signed an executive order that says if you government -- get government grant or contract you cannot dissuade on basis of sexual orientation. now we have this bizarre system where if you are a lesbian coming cannot be discriminated against, that is good, but if you are a lesbian jew, or a lesbian atheist, somebody can get the money and they we are not discriminating against you on the basis of sexual orientation, we're discriminating against you at this facility because you are an atheist. this makes no sense. that is where all these groups have said, on multiple occasions, to the administration. just clean this up. this is the biggest stain on the civil rights record of the obama administration. nothing has happened in all

these years. paragraphsnge a few in the bush executive order, and you fix the problem, and you bring integrity to the idea that religious discrimination is always wrong. and it is even worse with tax money involved. host: california, our line for republicans. caller: hello. i have a question for you. in thegly believe separation of church and state. and most americans agree with that. most americans agree with the bill of rights. at the beginning of the bill of rights, the way i understand it, and the way i was taught the whole bill of rights, is that it god-given,e unalienable rights, and then it

was the right. it says those rights are coming from god. do not really believe that those rights came from god. they came from the people that were writing the bill of rights. they were given to us from the government. the rights were not given to us by god. where did they get that idea from? out, or would you , or be in favor of taking out the phrases or the god language that exists? are you talking about the declaration of independence? we hold these truths to be self-evident, that we are

endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights? are you talking about that? that,: i'm talking about and some word talks about how we were given these right by god. i just feel like it is important to take all of the god language out of the constitution. what john is trying to point out is that language is constitution, not in the bill of rights, it is in the declaration of independence. it is very vague. there is a whole book that was written called the godless constitution. the point of those authors is that god is specifically not mentioned in the cause is you should do and they would argue for a reason. they wanted any prior document, the magna carta, the

declaration of independence, that those would not be the basis of constitutional rights in this country. god is not in the constitution, not to not be in the constitution. back in the 1940's and 1980's there were ever stupid jesus and were efforts to put a jesus amendment in the constitution, and that always fail in the rights that come in this country come from a document. but that document does not mention god. host: well, our line from independents. theer: i am proud of program you provide for the public. it is an open window for citizens to see what our government is doing. this guest is doing a lot of injustice and it should not have the reverent before his name. who are youaid

calling good, only one is good, and that is god. he has to rely something, this is holy. what you are talking about is holy. god is holy. andything about the word his plan about salvation is holy. what you need to realize is that what you are speaking here is profanity against the holiness of god. if you're a christian, like you say, you should have the holies where it beating him to death right now, because the holy spirit is it everyone who declares himself a christian, the son of god. but you need to also realize that elizabeth was old and age, and cannot have a child, and who gave her that house? child? god did. and that little child spoke, it kicks the wall of his mother

when he saw the son of god and his mother.de of do you understand what that means? with theunderstand story means to you, but it do not think it has anything to do with the questions of abortion. me argument you're making to was made to me by a united texas,congressman from when is testifying on the state of religious freedom in america. ofre is a dizzying amount religious freedom in america, but people who are practicing it are not christian, born-again or otherwise. congressman gomer started to ask me about going to heaven.

i know he was sitting on a panel with at least two jewish members and one buddhist member. usingected official taxpayers time to interrogate me about religion, i don't think that is appropriate. ishink congressman gomer probably a walking, talking example of why we need separation of church and state in this country. host: have you ever been quick to jump on the topic of separation of church and state? in your book you talk about your daughter praying at lunchtime. guest: yes, over spaghetti dinner she said, "when i prayed today," and i was immediately horrified. oh my goodness, she is in a public school and i will have to follow -- file a lawsuit and follow-up on this issue. anyone take ad

school stands and tell you to pray. she said no. i think of how about the cafeteria lady? did she tell you it was time to pray? and i think about why did you pray? and she said, because we always pray over them -- the meals and i was just would need to thank god for the food. which was a really good answer. she is doing what every child should do, pray in private, pray visibly, but do it without government acting on it. host: go ahead. caller: there are two groups today, christian religionists and politicians. to the christian religionists, two things i want to point out, christ said, if you broke one of

these laws, you've woken them all. -- you broke them all. sins at one time or another nailed him to the cross according to the christian religion. he said his kingdom is not of this earth. i'm going to tell you what christ in his own words said about government here on her. -- they you would think eventhem with things that they cannot keep. they love to sit at the head of .he table you pretend to be holy with your long speeches and public prayers while you are evicting widows from their homes. you snakes, you sons of vipers, how shall you escape the judgment of health? he doesn't want anything to do -- the judgment of hell?

he doesn't want anything to do with all of these governments on earth. he will replace them all someday. and that is what is really in the bible if you really study it. yes, good point. there are certainly many politicians in washington who say, you know, we read the bible and have a selective interest in explaining how the bible is .elevant to making policy but hypocrisy, unlike contraception, heterosexual or homosexual marriage, hypocrisy .s a sin in the christian bible these other things are not. host:

this is not a test. and, what you think about standardized tests. washington journal is live every morning. >> saturday marks the anniversary of hurricane katrina. war of theht, the hurricane damage and efforts. citizensaring with describing experiences. >> they took us to shelters.

and they declared the city of .ew orleans and, the recovery of the parish in louisiana. price you cannot describe it. -- >> you cannot describe it. all of your friends, your family, your family is gone. your family and friends, you do not see them like you used to. it is a feeling you do not forget. you will never forget it for the rest of your life. >> followed by the mayor. >> i am relying on you. this is the state and

federal level. i voted for you to represent me. do not know where to go or what to do. >> more from the atlantic conference. and, at 9:00, we will show you obama's trip to the region and his remarks on the recovery efforts. recoverycane katrina all this week. >> at a clean energy summit, had executive actions that made it easier to invest in improvements. he talked about solving problems. a power plantsed

with nationwide standards to end , a singledumping combat climateto change. this will accelerate cutting emissions and saving money by generating more clean energy. when i took office, i pledged to double the production by the end of the term and we met the goal of ahead of schedule. [applause] obama: the recovery marched the investment in clean energy. -- marked