There is a popular myth that the U. S. Constitution requires total separation of church and state. It doesn't. Actually, that is more of a Baptist doctrine than a constitutional issue. There is something close in the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution. That is more of a protection of people in the country, including those in the government, to worship God in the way that they believe is best, without any concern that Congress will force on them a competing religion or denomination. It also is supposed to prevent Congress from taking any action that would interfere with the free practice of religion.

Now, the framers of the Constitution had a clear idea of what "religion" meant. They were thinking of Christianity in its various forms, and probably Judaism. If anything else occurred to them, it was probably very similar. The current practice of considering alternate religions, such as witchcraft and those who advocate killing those who won't convert to their beliefs, as equivalent in some way and worthy of protection in the same way is a development that would probably shock the framers of the constitution.

It was never the intention of the founding fathers of the United States Government to prevent the practice of religion within the context of operation of government. Indeed, they were mostly Christian. They consistently opened sessions of congress with prayer—a practice that has continued. There are many instances of acknowledgement and appeal to God in this country's founding documents and in resolutions passed by congress. These were not regarded as violating the U. S. Constitution in any way, and indeed, they were not. They were not establishing a religion, just acknowledging the God that most of the people and the leaders believed in.

Church and state cannot and should not be totally separate. The state should not control the Church, nor should the leadership of any one denomination control the state. The Church, as in the whole Body of Christ, should strongly influence the state in matters of morality and righteousness. This calls for balance. I think that the founding fathers were thinking that there were enough Christians and morally sound people voting that a democracy would ensure this kind of influence. I think that they would be disappointed by some of the election results that we have had, but that was the idea, anyway. It isn't a perfect plan... but I haven't heard any better suggestions.

Yes, I just said that I don't believe in absolute separation of church and state. Absolute separation of church and state, if carried to its logical conclusion, would mandate a humanist-athiest government, which, in turn, would mean the establishment of a state religion, in contradiction to the First Amendment. That would be bad. On the other extreme, control of the U. S. Government by the Roman Catholic Pope or some similar church leader could concievably degrade to religious persecution of anyone who was not Roman Catholic (or whatever the "official" religion was). This is the sort of thing that led many people to flee England and come to America in the first place. This would also be bad. In between, the balanced position is that people worship God however they believe is best, seek Him diligently, and vote intelligently. This works best when churches are not penalized for participation in politics, and we leverage democracy to influence our own government towards righteousness.

The best way to vote is to vote the way the Holy Spirit of God leads you to vote. If enough people do that, righteousness will exalt our nation.