Why don't Conservatives understand Separation of Church and State?

You are delusional.

There are plenty of reasons besides religion to be against gay marriage and abortion

Conservatives are not wrong in the sense that the first amendment "free exercise" clause means individuals can support or oppose political issues based on their personal religious beliefs but if those beliefs turn into official government policy it becomes an first amendment "establishment clause" issue. If the only justification for an official state or federal government policy is based on solely religious reasoning than that policy would violate the first amendment because it would be the government favoring or establishing one religious belief over another. This is a concept every founding father espoused....no religion should be favored over another including no religion at all.

May I try to understand?

All people have some belief system be it taught by parents or religious leaders or by secular teachers, so how do we make individual decisions about what is moral and ethical if not by some source of teachings? And should we rule out or disqualify any source for those moral and ethical teachings? This after all where we get any laws in society, for instance murder or theft.

I know the separation of church and state, I also know that "morality" isn't entirely owned by the church. I believe the United States to have a moral base (though sometimes I wonder what direction it's drifting it)

Like the Church of Socialism.

we do understand it...liberals don't...the u.s. constitution states that the government will make no laws concerning the establishment of religion. this means simply that the government cannot legislate in any way that helps or hinders a religion. conversely, however, there is no prohibition against any religion voicing its support or opposition to government, its laws, policies, and so on. the church, like all other entities...individual, business, charity, etc....has, constitutionally, the freedom of speech, etc. the government is not supposed be allowed to keep religions from making their beliefs known and, as well, supporting those who politically go for things which are in keeping with such religious beliefs. in fact, even those in politics are in no way constrained, constitutionally, from being members of and/or believers in a religion. the fact that over the years we have accepted government intrusion into our religions, churches, etc., should never have happened. it is constitutionally prohibited. it is not about keeping the church out of government, it is about keeping government of the church. of course, like so many other things, we have allowed our government to establish not only laws, but rulings and other decisions about our religions, churches, synagogues, etc. think about it. we take for granted that our support of churches...gifts, tithes, offerings, etc.,...should be tax free, and therefore deductable. but that is simply saying that the government is subsidizing our churches, etc., and therefore aiding in the establishment of religion. people will blast me for saying that, but the facts cannot be denied. and by accepting this deduction idea, we then place our churches and those in charge under constraint of law to remain non-political in certain situations. for example, a pastor is not allowed to use the pulpit...leading a public gathering, in other words...to give his support to a candidate running for office. he may certainly talk about his preferences when acting as an individual, but in the capacity of being the church leader, and speaking publicly, he cannot. therefore, the government not only allows the tax deductions for offerings made by the people in the church, but then also has control in some circumstances about what goes on in the church. the funny thing is that many liberals will tell you they are against the tax deduction thing all the while maintaining that the government should and must maintain control over the church and what is preached or otherwise disseminated. it is the liberal side of politics that does not understand.

There is no mention of it in the Constitution and no, Jefferson was NOT against religion. He actually edited the bible down to simplistic terms to be handed out to Native Americans. He also had church services held in the Capital building.

Actually the idea of the separation of church and state was to protect the CHURCH from the state.

Our Founding Father's believed in freedom OF religion - not freedom FROM religion.

Why did Democrats want to murder children?

http://www.washingtonguardian.com/washingtons-scho...

"Beneath the expressions of grief, sorrow and disbelief over the Connecticut school massacre lies an uneasy truth in Washington: over the last few years the Obama administration and Congress quietly let federal funding for several key school security programs lapse in the name of budget savings."

Because it's not stated anywhere in the Constitution which every elected officials takes an oath to preserve, protect and defend when they're sworn into office.

To insist no theist in the public square or life, is to establish a religion/belief - a-theism.. it alone not banned from education, and there's certainly no proof for it, hence it is belief.