UCLNLP/adversarial_qa huggingface dataset:
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

J. Brent Walker, Executive Director of the Baptist Joint Committee, responded to Hamburger's claims noting; "The fact that the separation of church and state has been supported by some who exhibited an anti-Catholic animus or a secularist bent does not impugn the validity of the principle. Champions of religious liberty have argued for the separation of church and state for reasons having nothing to do with anti-Catholicism or desire for a secular culture. Of course, separationists have opposed the Catholic Church when it has sought to tap into the public till to support its parochial schools or to argue for on-campus released time in the public schools. But that principled debate on the issues does not support a charge of religious bigotry"

Question: The Christian beliefs of __ are based on the Nicene Creed.
Answer: Catholic

Question: What kind of people were some who were in favor of the separation of church and state?
Answer: anti-Catholic

Question: In some Canadian provinces __ schools are publicly funded and in Ontario completely to the level of grade 12.
Answer: Catholic

Question: The separation of church and state has been supported by people who want what people to have freedom?
Answer: religious

Question: In India, __ educational institutions are second in numbers behind government run schools.
Answer: Catholic

Question: Separationists were noted to have express what kind of traits?
Answer: anti-Catholicism or desire for a secular culture

Question: Someone who believes in the separation of church and state may have?
Answer: anti-Catholic animus or a secularist bent

Question: Who did the Baptist Joint Commitee reply to?
Answer: Hamburger

Question: Walker says being a supporter of separation of church and state is not based on personal background but on?
Answer: principle
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Jefferson's opponents said his position was the destruction and the governmental rejection of Christianity, but this was a caricature. In setting up the University of Virginia, Jefferson encouraged all the separate sects to have preachers of their own, though there was a constitutional ban on the State supporting a Professorship of Divinity, arising from his own Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. Some have argued that this arrangement was "fully compatible with Jefferson's views on the separation of church and state;" however, others point to Jefferson's support for a scheme in which students at the University would attend religious worship each morning as evidence that his views were not consistent with strict separation. Still other scholars, such as Mark David Hall, attempt to sidestep the whole issue by arguing that American jurisprudence focuses too narrowly on this one Jeffersonian letter while failing to account for other relevant history

Question: What conflicted with the separation of church and state at UVA?
Answer: a scheme in which students at the University would attend religious worship each morning

Question: Who was born later, Jefferson or Mark David Hall?
Answer: Mark David Hall

Question: What made some doubt Jefferson as religious at the college?
Answer: a constitutional ban on the State supporting a Professorship of Divinity

Question: Which of the following does not support the claim that Jefferson wanted strict separation of church and state: religious worship each morning at the university or the constitutional ban on the State supporting a Professorship of Divinity?
Answer: religious worship each morning

Question: What was the evidence of Jefferson's backpedaling on the separation of church and state?
Answer: one Jeffersonian letter

Question: How were Jefferson's views communicated?
Answer: Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom

Question: What is Hall's role?
Answer: scholars

Question: How did Jefferson avoid Virginia's possible provision of theology at UVA?
Answer: a constitutional ban

Question: What is the major debate among historians regarding President Jefferson?
Answer: Jefferson's views on the separation of church and state

Question: Which of the following is the name of a law: Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom, Professorship of Divinity, or Mark David Hall?
Answer: Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom

Question: What was Jefferson a huge proponent of, although sometimes doubted?
Answer: separation of church and state

Question: What is more important than one man's view when it comes to the separation of church and state?
Answer: other relevant history
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

^Note 2: in 1789 the Georgia Constitution was amended as follows: "Article IV. Section 10. No person within this state shall, upon any pretense, be deprived of the inestimable privilege of worshipping God in any manner agreeable to his own conscience, nor be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith and judgment; nor shall he ever be obliged to pay tithes, taxes, or any other rate, for the building or repairing any place of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes to be right, or hath voluntarily engaged to do. No one religious society shall ever be established in this state, in preference to another; nor shall any person be denied the enjoyment of any civil right merely on account of his religious principles."

Question: No one shall be obliged to pay taxes for what?
Answer: building or repairing any place of worship

Question: What can you not base taking rights away in Georgia according to the Constitution?
Answer: religious principles

Question: What might Muslims use for Allah?
Answer: God

Question: What might suggest atheists are not covered by this document?
Answer: be deprived of the inestimable privilege of worshipping God in any manner agreeable to his own conscience

Question: What might suggest there had been an attempt to establish an official religion?
Answer: No one religious society shall ever be established in this state, in preference to another

Question: What might suggest there might have been attempts to discriminate based on religion?
Answer: nor shall any person be denied the enjoyment of any civil right merely on account of his religious principles

Question: What are people not forced to do under the Georgia Constitution?
Answer: be deprived of the inestimable privilege of worshipping God in any manner agreeable to his own conscience, nor be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith and judgment; nor shall he ever be obliged to pay tithes, taxes, or any other rate, for the building or repairing any place of worship

Question: What can't be forced upon somebody for constructing a religious center?
Answer: tithes, taxes, or any other rate

Question: Religious principles can't be used to deny what?
Answer: civil right

Question: A person can't be forced to do what for the maintenance of a ministry?
Answer: pay tithes, taxes, or any other rate

Question: What is protected by the Georgia Constitution?
Answer: civil right

Question: A person can't be obligated to pay what for building or repairing a place of worship?
Answer: tithes, taxes, or any other rate
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

On December 20, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled in the case of ACLU v. Mercer County that the continued display of the Ten Commandments as part of a larger display on American legal traditions in a Kentucky courthouse was allowed, because the purpose of the display (educating the public on American legal traditions) was secular in nature. In ruling on the Mount Soledad cross controversy on May 3, 2006, however, a federal judge ruled that the cross on public property on Mount Soledad must be removed.

Question: What was the ruling that occurred sometime during the 7th year of the 2000s?
Answer: the cross on public property on Mount Soledad must be removed

Question: What determined the Ten commandments at a Kentucky courthouseto be secular in nature?
Answer: ACLU v. Mercer County

Question: What happened in the 6th year of the 2000s?
Answer: the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled in the case of ACLU v. Mercer County

Question: Who brought this case before the courts?
Answer: ACLU

Question: How was the Ten commandments at a Kentucky courthouse seen to be to be secular in nature
Answer: educating the public on American legal traditions

Question: What was the purported intent of showing the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the courthouse?
Answer: educating the public on American legal traditions

Question: What type of display was in the courthouse?
Answer: secular

Question: Who was the plaintiff in this case?
Answer: ACLU

Question: WHy was the Ten Commandments allowed to be kept in the courthouse?
Answer: secular in nature

Question: What happened in the 7th year of the 2000s?
Answer: ruling on the Mount Soledad cross controversy

Question: When was a religious symbol  not seen as secular and ordered removed?
Answer: Mount Soledad cross controversy

Question: What was it about the display that made it okay?
Answer: the purpose of the display (educating the public on American legal traditions) was secular in nature
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

The first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" The two parts, known as the "establishment clause" and the "free exercise clause" respectively, form the textual basis for the Supreme Court's interpretations of the "separation of church and state" doctrine. Three central concepts were derived from the 1st Amendment which became America's doctrine for church-state separation: no coercion in religious matters, no expectation to support a religion against one's will, and religious liberty encompasses all religions. In sum, citizens are free to embrace or reject a faith, any support for religion - financial or physical - must be voluntary, and all religions are equal in the eyes of the law with no special preference or favoritism.

Question: What are the core aspects of religious protection of the first amendment?
Answer: citizens are free to embrace or reject a faith, any support for religion - financial or physical - must be voluntary, and all religions are equal in the eyes of the law with no special preference or favoritism

Question: Why are people allowed to worship anything they like in America?
Answer: first amendment

Question: What allowed people to worship as they please in America?
Answer: first amendment

Question: Which of the following is not a clause in the first amendment: establishment, textual or free exercise?
Answer: establishment

Question: How many religions are not protected by the first amendment?
Answer: liberty encompasses all religions

Question: What are the core parts of the first amendment concerning religious practices?
Answer: The two parts

Question: What guarantees someone the right to practice religion?
Answer: The first amendment

Question: Who is specifically restricted from making laws to set up a state religion?
Answer: Congress

Question: How are religion and government related in America?
Answer: church-state separation

Question: Which of the following is not a form of support for religion: financial, central or physical?
Answer: central

Question: Which of the following is not a central concept of the 1st Amendment: no coercion, the Supreme Court, or no expectation to support a religion?
Answer: the Supreme Court

Question: Why can anyone create a church in America?
Answer: first amendment

Question: Who ultimately decides the meaning and parameters of the first amendment under the law?
Answer: the Supreme Court

Question: Why can anyone decide to worship in any manner they desire in America?
Answer: first amendment

Question: As interpreted by the Supreme Court, what does the Constitution say about forced religious adherence?
Answer: no expectation to support a religion against one's will

Question: What must be the relationship between church and state according to the interpretation of the Supreme Court?
Answer: separation
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Some legal scholars, such as John Baker of LSU, theorize that Madison's initial proposed language—that Congress should make no law regarding the establishment of a "national religion"—was rejected by the House, in favor of the more general "religion" in an effort to appease the Anti-Federalists. To both the Anti-Federalists and the Federalists, the very word "national" was a cause for alarm because of the experience under the British crown. During the debate over the establishment clause, Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts took issue with Madison's language regarding whether the government was a national or federal government (in which the states retained their individual sovereignty), which Baker suggests compelled Madison to withdraw his language from the debate.

Question: What representative proposed the change?
Answer: Madison

Question: What was the solution
Answer: the more general "religion"

Question: What is the difference in the views?
Answer: that Congress should make no law regarding the establishment of a "national religion"—was rejected by the House, in favor of the more general "religion" in an effort to appease the Anti-Federalists

Question: Which group was most against the word national?
Answer: Anti-Federalists

Question: Who was Madison and his colleagues trying to get away from?
Answer: the British crown

Question: Why was the language included?
Answer: the very word "national" was a cause for alarm

Question: What must congress make no law regarding the establishment of?
Answer: religion

Question: Which part of government did Rep. Elbridge work for?
Answer: the House

Question: What does the language suggest?
Answer: During the debate over the establishment clause, Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts took issue with Madison's language regarding whether the government was a national or federal government (in which the states retained their individual sovereignty), which Baker suggests compelled Madison to withdraw his language from the debate

Question: Who wanted to use the word national?
Answer: Madison

Question: Which of a national or a federal government allows states to keep their individual sovereignty?
Answer: federal

Question: What was the name of the rule regarding a countrywide religion?
Answer: the establishment clause

Question: Which is less general between Madison's initial version and the final version?
Answer: Madison's initial proposed language
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

The incorporation of the First Amendment establishment clause in the landmark case of Everson v. Board of Education has impacted the subsequent interpretation of the separation of church and state in regard to the state governments. Although upholding the state law in that case, which provided for public busing to private religious schools, the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment establishment clause was fully applicable to the state governments. A more recent case involving the application of this principle against the states was Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet (1994).

Question: Who was the landmark case brought against?
Answer: Board of Education

Question: The Supreme Court made what clause applicable to the state governments?
Answer: Although upholding the state law in that case, which provided for public busing to private religious schools, the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment establishment clause was fully applicable to the state governments

Question: Who was the case in the 1990s brought against?
Answer: Grumet

Question: A religious school is a part of the?
Answer: church

Question: The Supreme Court deals with matters of?
Answer: law

Question: What did the Everson case mean for society?
Answer: the First Amendment establishment clause was fully applicable to the state governments

Question: Joel Village School District v. Grumet had what principle applied?
Answer: the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment establishment clause was fully applicable to the state governments

Question: Why was the Everson case so important?
Answer: the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment establishment clause was fully applicable to the state governments

Question: What was the consequence of the Everson case?
Answer: the First Amendment establishment clause was fully applicable to the state governments

Question: Upholding the state law in the first case, did what?
Answer: The incorporation of the First Amendment establishment clause in the landmark case of Everson v. Board of Education has impacted the subsequent interpretation of the separation of church and state in regard to the state governments. Although upholding the state law in that case, which provided for public busing to private religious schools

Question: Which case had an impart on separation of church and state?
Answer: Everson v. Board of Education has impacted the subsequent interpretation of the separation of church and state in regard to the state governments

Question: Who was the defendant in the case in the 1990s that dealt with religious institutions and government?
Answer: Grumet
Portugal

After the financial crisis of 2007–08, it was known in 2008–2009 that two Portuguese banks (Banco Português de Negócios (BPN) and Banco Privado Português (BPP)) had been accumulating losses for years due to bad investments, embezzlement and accounting fraud. The case of BPN was particularly serious because of its size, market share, and the political implications - Portugal's then current President, Cavaco Silva, and some of his political allies, maintained personal and business relationships with the bank and its CEO, who was eventually charged and arrested for fraud and other crimes. In the grounds of avoiding a potentially serious financial crisis in the Portuguese economy, the Portuguese government decided to give them a bailout, eventually at a future loss to taxpayers and to the Portuguese people in general.

Question: How did this impact the economy?
Answer: two Portuguese banks (Banco Português de Negócios (BPN) and Banco Privado Português (BPP)) had been accumulating losses for years due to bad investments, embezzlement and accounting fraud

Question: Which of the following is not one of the causes of the bank failure: bad investments, a bailout or embezzlement?
Answer: a bailout

Question: Which of the following is not a bank: BPN, BPP or CEO?
Answer: CEO

Question: Who bailed out BPN?
Answer: the Portuguese government

Question: What were the reprecussions of the charges?
Answer: the Portuguese government decided to give them a bailout

Question: Which of the following is the name of a person: Silva, Negocios or Privado?
Answer: Silva

Question: BPN was bailed out for what reason?
Answer: avoiding a potentially serious financial crisis in the Portuguese economy

Question: How far did the crisis reach?
Answer: Portugal's then current President, Cavaco Silva, and some of his political allies, maintained personal and business relationships with the bank and its CEO

Question: What was of siginificant worry?
Answer: The case of BPN

Question: Which bank got bailed out?
Answer: BPN

Question: Who was implicated in the crisis?
Answer: its CEO, who was eventually charged and arrested for fraud and other crimes

Question: Silva had a relationship with which bank?
Answer: BPN
Portugal

A year before Alfonso III "the Great" of Asturias death, three of Alfonso's sons rose in rebellion and forced him to abdicate, partitioning the kingdom among them. The eldest son, García, became king of León. The second son, Ordoño, reigned in Galicia, while the third, Fruela, received Asturias with Oviedo as his capital. Alfonso died in Zamora, probably in 910. His former realm would be reunited when first García died childless and León passed to Ordoño. He in turn died when his children were too young to ascend; Fruela became king of a reunited crown. His death the next year initiated a series of internecine struggles that led to unstable succession for over a century. It continued under that name[clarification needed] until incorporated into the Kingdom of Castile in 1230, after Ferdinand III became joint king of the two kingdoms. This was done to avoid dynastic feuds and to maintain the Christian Kingdoms strong enough to prevent complete Muslim take over of the Iberian Peninsula and to further the Reconquista of Iberia by Christian armies.

Question: what is the first measurement of time mentioned?
Answer: year

Question: Why didn't they like Alfonso?
Answer: internecine

Question: what is the last faith mentioned?
Answer: Christian

Question: Who took over the kingdom?
Answer: three of Alfonso's sons

Question: Who was Ordono's father?
Answer: Alfonso III

Question: Were Alfonso's children old enough to take over the monarchy when he died?
Answer: He in turn died when his children were too young to ascend

Question: Who was Fruela's father?
Answer: Alfonso III

Question: What kingdoms did Alfonso rule over?
Answer: León. The second son, Ordoño, reigned in Galicia

Question: what is the last place mentioned?
Answer: Iberia

Question: What happened to Alfonso's first son?
Answer: García, became king of León

Question: what is the last event mentioned?
Answer: Reconquista of Iberia

Question: Who was Garcia's father?
Answer: Alfonso III

Question: what is the first place mentioned?
Answer: León

Question: Did the original Garcia give birth to heirs?
Answer: García died childless
Portugal

After annexing the County of Portugal into one of the several counties that made up the Kingdom of Asturias, King Alfonso III of Asturias knighted Vimara Peres, in 868 AD, as the First Count of Portus Cale (Portugal). The region became known as Portucale, Portugale, and simultaneously Portugália — the County of Portugal. Later the Kingdom of Asturias was divided into a number of Christian Kingdoms in Northern Spain due to dynastic divisions of inheritance among the kings offspring. With the forced abdication of Alfonso III "the Great" of Asturias by his sons in 910, the Kingdom of Asturias split into three separate kingdoms of León, Galicia and Asturias. The three kingdoms were eventually reunited in 924 (León and Galicia in 914, Asturias later) under the crown of León.

Question: when were Leon and Galicia reunited?
Answer: 914

Question: who was first count of portus cale?
Answer: Vimara Peres

Question: what region became known as Portugale?
Answer: Portus Cale

Question: what was reunited under the crown of  Leon?
Answer: The three kingdoms

Question: Who was higher in social status, Alfonso or Vimara Peres?
Answer: Alfonso

Question: when did the kingdom of asturias split into three separate kingdoms?
Answer: 910

Question: what region became known as Portugalia?
Answer: Portus Cale

Question: what region became known as Portucale?
Answer: Portus Cale

Question: what region became known as Portugale?
Answer: Portus Cale

Question: what region became known as Portugalia?
Answer: Portus Cale

Question: Which came first, the forced abdication of Alfonso III or the reunion of the three kingdoms?
Answer: forced abdication

Question: Which of the following does not refer to the same region: Portucale, Spain or Portugale?
Answer: Spain