Separation of church and state does not mean we are an atheist nation, plain and simple.
I didn't see the point as hate. It was about pointing out, as clearly as possible, what kinds of separations exist between church and state historically, so that we keep some idea of what the phrase "separation between church and state" effectively means.
Show me were in any of the constitution, or Decrlaration of Independence that we cannot use bilical principals, or anyother form of morals to make up who and what we are.
I didn't think that's what they were saying. I didn't see the message as inherently hateful either.
But there was clearly an agenda. The agenda was to try and make clear the historical meaning of "separation of church and state." And by doing so, I assume they were hoping that we'd follow that.
I should start a new nation, and the first ammendment will read, a separation of science and state. Especially since nothing in science is proven.
I actually think this is a topic worth discussion. Maybe you could make a PNT and propose how you'd want such a nation to work? We can think about the pros and cons of that. I'm sure there'd be a lot to talk about, and it would help us talk about what we each believe the roles of religion and science should be in our lives.
By the way, I got a 16. I didn't know most of the answers, but given the title of the website, and the tone of the questions, it was easy enough to come up with good guesses for each question. Like I said, they clearly had an agenda. But that's an OK thing.