There is separation of Church and Sate in the United States.

My opponent states that there is a difference between using the generic word "God" and claiming that it represents an infiltration of the State, but let us look at the definition of this word. ". .. a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality. .. "[1] By default, one can see that the definition of God, is rooted in referring to religion, or any other supernatural being. The argument is indeed false, because even though my opponent states different names of God in different religions, as a whole the word God still has religious leanings. 1)"Even though widely used, The Pledge of Allegiance is not a law nor its use mandatory either in public schools nor as a part of any state function. " That may be so, but I would like to look upon the fact that ;"The United States Congress officially recognized the Pledge as the official national pledge on June 22, 1942. "[2] Even if this work is not a law, and it is not mandatory, it is recognized in Congress, a part of the national and federal government. If a government was indeed a government separated by Church and State, why should a work having a phase such as "One Nation Under God" be recognized by a law making part of its government? Also, my opponent describes that the court case of Newdow v. Rio came to the stating that the words were of "ceremonial and patriotic nature" and did not constitute an establishment of religion. But, one could also see that just because a item or written work is in ceremonial and patriotic nature, does not mean that it is non-religious in nature. For example, in England, their patriotic songs are in religious root, with lyrics of, "And guardian Angels sung this strain" and "God save the Queen! "[3]. This notation is no different than our own with the national anthem, a patriotic song, ". .. Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n rescued land" and, "Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just, And this be our motto:In God is our trust;"[4]. My opponent argues that Americans are not required to celebrate the religious ceremonies. On federal holidays, the government closes down "Non-essential federal government offices. "[5] Truly, if the government was separated by Church and State, we as a nation would not set aside a day for a holiday that is defined as,"A worldwide holiday that celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ. " Jesus Christ is a figure of Christianity, and this national holiday is under this name, along with having a national Christmas tree in front of the white house, lit by the president. Finally, my opponent states that I made a mistake on where our currency is printed. He states,"Currency in the United States of America is printed by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, which acts under the jurisdiction of the U. S. Department of the Treasury. " My opponent fails to recognize that the Department of Treasury is headed by a man named Timothy F. Geithner. This man also makes up President Obama's current cabinet. [6] Also, Geithner is in charge of,"Currency and coinage;" and,"Advising on domestic and international financial, monetary, economic, trade and tax policy;. " Clearly, if one has the power to tax the people, which in turn this money is used on a federal level, they indeed are connected to the government in many ways. I would also like to ask my opponent another question. Has there ever been a president without religious beliefs, claimed either in their campaigns or said by them directly? My opponent fails to recognize the many signs of in which the government has traces of any religion in this country, which are ingrained in American government. ------------------------- [1]. http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [3]. http://www.know-britain.com... [4]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [5]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [6]. http://www.cbsnews.com...