Separation of Church and State seems to have been a novel idea, but how is this actually enforced or monitored? Of course politicians have cultural or religious connections, which shouldn't preclude them from continuing to have both simultaneously. But when politicians use pulpits for campaigning, or when pastors/reverends/bishops, etc use them for political statements, why should it matter? This goes to tax exempt status of a non-profit organization. If not for this statute, many politicians could simply convert churches and other religions/non-profit organizations into their campaign headquarters where donations and funds could be undisclosed under the tax-exempt clause provided to 501(c)(3) status. So when this happens... Paula White and Sheryl Brady come to mind What is it that draws political figures to churches, not just to attend and listen, but to speak? TV Evangelists, or whatever they call themselves now, typically were constantly chiming in on political affairs and giving advice and instructions to their parishioners on what to do and how to think about them. Pat Robertson is one in particular that is known for this. How does any of this conflict, if there is any conflict, with the separation of church and state clauses?