How to Disprove David Barton: Let Me Count the Ways

David Barton is a conservative historian who argues primarily against the separation of church and state. His credentials consist of a B.A. from Oral Roberts University and an honorary doctorate in Letters from Pensecola Christian College. He has published many books and articles – today’s focus is on his “Separation of Church & State: What the Founders Meant.”
Aside from Barton’s obviously missing education in History and his consistently quoting and citing himself, his arguments themselves leave me wondering if he actually read the texts he's quoting. I don't have a ton of time, so I'll have to follow this post up with a more complete refutation of Barton's multiple errors (in my opinion). But for now, I'll bullet list some for now:

– In his 20 page discussion of separation of church and state, Barton devotes pages 5-6 to an extensive straw man with his find of the perfect liberal idiot. Apparently, Barton found a US Congressman and former lawyer (unnamed, conveniently) who not only had no clue that the phrase “separation of church and state” was not actually quoted from the Constitution but also had never read the Constitution. All right, some Congressmen may be…dumb (?), but this is not a fair representation of his opposition.

– Barton mentions that during debate on wording for the Bill of Rights, Congress went through many drafts with much debate on the First Amendment’s wording. All previous drafts used the word “denomination” instead of the word “religion.” Based on this, Barton argues that they were synonymous. Really? They debated heavily and on the last day decided to just change the wording for no reason? Instead, it would be logical to assume that after all the debate and discussion, the Framers decided that freedom of religion was more comprehensive than mere freedom of denomination.

– Barton argues that the freedom of religion as described in the First Amendment was really meant to promote religion in the government, governmental functions, and subsequent branches. Why then did Jefferson, Madison, Washington, Franklin, and many others seem allergic to the idea that religion would run the government? It was not simply the prospect of government controlling religion that scared them; inherently included in this justified fear was that religion would overtake government. Governmental religion or religion-run government are really the same thing – religion and government mixing.
MORE TO COME!!!