The misconception stems from the fact that it's called "The Seperation of Church and State clause", which does say that the government cannot make laws that unfairly promote or marginalize a particular religion.

The problem is not that these new politicos are creating inherently (or at least overtly) new laws that promote christianity over all other; the problem is that they are using their political clout to promote their morals over the morals of others. A fine distinction which has kept it legal so far. Of course, what they're doing is perfectly commendable in a free democracy, as they're mobilizing people who believe in similar issues to vote and work on their goals to promote their platforms.

Their methods, though, are questionable. The whole "Evolution is a theory, not a fact" is using people's common misconceptions of the english language to promote their platform. The whole procurement of the medical records of late term abortions is highly questionable and quite possibly illegal, and I think the discrimination of any legal benefits to cohabitation is quite discriminatory as well. The censorship? I have yet to weigh in on that topic, as there is such a thing as inappropriate text for children to read... but if they start banning things like Catcher in the Rye again, I will be very pissed.

The Federal gov't has no say in what they do, unless it expressly violates the power and the protections put in place by the Federal government, and that is for the courts to decide.

Hell, if you wish to teach religion in public schools, offer an optional relgious studies class. Just don't mix Science with Religion... I'm not saying they're like oil and water, but they can coexist without perverting each other.