"I don't believe there is a separation of church and state. I think the Constitution is very clear. The only separation is that there will not be a government church"

In this quote, Tom DeLay expresses a particular analysis of the U.S. Constitution concerning the concept of the separation of church and state. Hold-up recommends that the Constitution does not mandate a strict division in between spiritual organizations and government however instead stresses that there must not be an official government-sponsored church.

DeLay's interpretation appears to be focused around the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which specifies, "Congress shall make no law appreciating a facility of faith, or forbiding the totally free workout thereof". This part of the Constitution is frequently pointed out in discussions about the separation of church and state. Historically, this principle has been analyzed to mean that the federal government needs to not prefer one religion over another which religious practices need to not affect governmental policies, therefore maintaining a degree of self-reliance in between spiritual organizations and the state.

Nevertheless, DeLay is arguing that the main concern of the framers was to avoid the establishment of a state-endorsed church, similar to the Church of England. By specifying that he doesn't think in the separation of church and state, DeLay is challenging the wider interpretation of this constitutional principle which promotes for a complete exemption of religion from public governance and policy-making.

This view has been a point of contention in American politics. Some, like DeLay, argue that faith and religious worths can favorably influence government policies and that the exclusion of religious perspectives might lead to a less ethically grounded governance. Others argue that a stringent separation guarantees that federal government remains neutral on spiritual matters, therefore securing individual religious flexibilities.

In essence, DeLay's quote represents a constitutional interpretation not unusual amongst certain political and spiritual groups who feel that spiritual worths need to have a more noticable presence in public life and governance, as long as no single religion is officially approved by the state.