Blog Archives

The Truth about Separation of Church and State


1st Amendment

 

I have been several parts of a series entitled Disputing Separation Church/State (Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6). As of this writing I am up to Part Six and there is more to come. In doing the reading for these posts I came across a PDF designed as a brochure to dispute the Leftist influence that has move American Courts to stretch the interpretation of the First Amendment beyond the scope of its original intent. As I said I am still continuing my series on the subject; however below is an excellent to the point and relatively brief synopsis of reasons the present exploitation of the rule of law pertaining to the separation of Church and State is not a legal concept in the U.S. Constitution.

 

JRH 3/31/14

Please Support NCCR

******************************

The Truth about Separation of Church and State

Contrary to popular opinion, the term “separation of church and state” is found nowhere in the United States Constitution.

 

From PDF Brochure:

Alliance Defending Freedom

 

While the First Amendment clearly forbids the creation of a national denomination, it says nothing about the so-called “separation of church and state.”

 

§  The term “separation of church and state” was first used by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1801, when he responded to their concerns about state involvement in religion. Jefferson’s letter had nothing to say about limiting public religious expression, but dealt with government’s interference in the public expression of faith.

 

 

§  It was U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black who first inserted the term “separation of church and state” into American jurisprudence in his majority opinion of Everson v. Board of Education (1947). He wrote: “The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. The wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach.”

 

 

§  Black’s opinion was based on a previous misreading of Jefferson’s 1801 letter in the U.S. Supreme Court decision Reynolds v. United States (1878). Black also confused his history. In the opinion, he wrote that the Danbury letter was “almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the First Amendment.”

 

 

§  The First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion; or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” No mention is made of a “wall between church and state.”

 

 

§  The true purpose of the First Amendment was to prohibit the federal government from establishing a national church, like the Church of England, or require that sectarian policy be forced on an individual state or on the federal government. While the amendment does recognize a “differentiation between church and the government, it does not mean that they could not cooperate with each other.”

 

 

§  In 2001, Daniel Dreisbach, Associate Professor of Justice, Law and Society at American University, wrote that Black was wrong to apply the term “separation of church and state” to the First Amendment. The danger of Black’s argument, according to Dreisbach, is that it gives constitutional reasons to “separate religion, religious values, and religious organizations from public life.” He continues: “If we can’t talk about religion in any meaningful way in public schools, religious citizens can’t communicate their faith in public life. [The public square] must be ‘sanitized’ of religious messages, and we are left with a strictly secular public life.”

 

 

§  The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and its allies, along with other groups hostile to religious freedom, have used Black’s wording to:

 

o   Deny churches the right to rent public school facilities for Sunday worship services.

 

o   Have public displays of the Ten Commandments removed from public buildings.

 

o   Prohibit students from praying at graduation ceremonies or football games.

 

o   Threaten fixed income housing project residents with eviction for displaying signs about prayer in their apartment windows.

 

o   Tell an eight-year-old girl that she cannot pass out handmade Valentines that read “Jesus Loves You.”

 

o   Tell pastors that they do not have the right to speak freely from their pulpits applying Scripture and church teaching to candidates and elections.

 

 

§  In 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in ruling in favor of a public display of the Ten Commandments, wrote: “The ACLU’s argument contains…fundamental flaws… [It] makes repeated reference to ‘the separation of church and state.’ This extra-constitutional construct has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state.”

 

 

For almost four decades, the ACLU’s distortion of the “separation of church and state” went nearly unchallenged. Since 1994, Alliance Defending Freedom has taken the ACLU and its allies head-on to expose this distortion and restore the original intent of U.S. Constitution with regard to religious freedom. Since its inception, Alliance Defending Freedom has helped to win many groundbreaking cases in defense of religious freedom and expression. The result is that the so-called “wall of separation,” erected by Hugo Black and others, is slowly starting to crumble. With your prayers and support, Alliance Defending Freedom will continue to tear down the “wall of separation.”

_______________________________

About – ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM: FOR FAITH. FOR JUSTICE.

 

Alliance Defending Freedom is a servant ministry building an alliance to keep the door open for the spread of the Gospel by transforming the legal system and advocating for religious liberty, the sanctity of life, and marriage and family.

 

Recognizing the need for a strong, coordinated legal defense against growing attacks on religious freedom, more than 30 prominent Christian leaders launched Alliance Defending Freedom in 1994. Over the past 18 years, this unique legal ministry has brought together thousands of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations that work tirelessly to advocate for the right of people to freely live out their faith in America and around the world.

 

Building an Alliance for Victory

 

Unlike any other legal organization, Alliance Defending Freedom employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to empower its allies and READ THE REST

Disputing Separation Church/State Part 5


G. Washington- Rightly Govern only by God & Bible

John R. Houk
© March 26, 2014
 
Here we go continuing to refute Dougindeap’s false belief the Church/State separation is as much a part of the Constitution as are the separation branch powers and checks and balances.
 
Similarly, they [i.e. the Founding Fathers] did not merely say there should be separation of church and state; rather, they actually separated them by … (2) according that government limited, enumerated powers, (3) saying nothing to connect that government to god(s) or religion, (4) saying nothing to give that government power over matters of god(s) or religion, and (5), indeed, saying nothing substantive about god(s) or religion at all except in a provision precluding any religious test for public office. (Dougindeap from: The Commonality between Leftist Paradigms & Scientific Theories; SlantRight 2.0; 3/13/14)
 
Dougindeap’s point two is vaguely cryptic. What in the world does he mean by “… they actually separated them by … (2) according that government limited, enumerated powers”?
 
An accurate statement might be seen in a rearrangement of the word order of the Dougindeap quote. How about something like:
 
The Founding Fathers separated powers (since power resides in the government that being separated must refer to the constitutionally defined Branches] by (2) according limiting government by enumerated the Branch powers.
 
This reordering of wording is a point I can get on board with because is a bit more clarity to extract an understanding. The Founding Fathers intent with the Constitution was to limit government in the context of affecting personal Liberty of American citizens. The object of employing checks and balances between the Branches was so that no single Branch could achieve despotic unchecked power over the government and hence over Americans promised Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness as a way of life.
 
Government was to be limited to enforcing the rule of law that should be designed for the general welfare according to the moral of Nature’s God – the Creator – Who has placed the measuring stick for what is right and wrong for a good society.
 
I have established in Part Two that the Original Intent of the phrase of “general welfare” of the Constitution’s Preamble was in relation to the framing of Nature by Nature’s God the Creator. I quoted the Father of our Nation George Washington followed by an observation:
 

“No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts in the affairs of men more than the people of the United States. — Every step, by which they have been advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency.”
George Washington (Quote found, “SEVENPRINCIPLES OF LIBERTY: I LIBERTY IS OF DIVINE ORIGIN; By J. David Gowdy; Institute for American Liberty; Copyright © 1996)
 
As far as Liberty is concerned the Founding Fathers in the majority that religion (meaning Christianity in the 1780s) was essential for a virtuous and moral society to remain cohesive in the practice of Liberty or chaos will ensue that will only despotic rule could quell. (Disputing Separation Church/State Part 2)
 
The should and must recognize that this provides a context for the First Amendment that Justice Hugo Black must have willfully ignored in the majority decision of Everson v. Board of Education in 1947 which ONLY THEN not only upheld the intent of keeping government out of religion BUT ALSO extra-constitutionally added that religion must not have any contact with a taxpayer supported government operation on a Local, State and Federal basis.
 
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Bold Emphasis Mine First Amendment)
 
There is no place in the First Amendment that enumerates that Christianity should not be the moral basis for the rule of law foundation in the U.S. Constitution. That which is enumerated is that Congress – the vehicle for legislating law and establishing a government budget – MUST not make any laws establishing an established religion (meaning in the 1780s the Christian Church). And the First Amendment specifically enumerates that Congress shall prohibit the “free exercise” of religion (AGAIN meaning the Christian Church in the 1780s).
 
ERGO Dougindeap is wrong that the Founding Fathers created a Constitutional paradigm of Separation of Church and State in the sense that American practicing Christians must keep their faith out of the government. In relation to the State the only enumeration of power separation is that the government must stay out of the worship business of the Church in not establishing the preeminence of one Denomination over another Denomination whether that be Protestant, Catholic and by extension the Eastern Orthodox Churches that were not common in the USA in the 1780s and 1790s.
 
End of Part Five
 
o   Part One
 
o   Part Two
 
 
o   Part Four
 
 
JRH 3/26/14

Please Support NCCR

Obama’s DoD v The Constitution


I am a huge fan of The Patriot Post and Mark Alexander. Indeed, I have a Patriot Post banner on my SlantRight 2.0 blog in which you can click to receive a free subscription of the online magazine in your inbox.

 

On Wednesday Alexander posted an exposé of the United States Air Force Academy’s persecution of religious freedom in which points a finger at guess who for officially instituting such a policy? If you are a Conservative you KNOW it was the America’s own Marxist-in-Chief President Barack Hussein Obama. The atheist tool needling Obama’s military policy at the Air Force Academy (AFA) is Mikey Weinstein.

 

I am cross posting Mark Alexander’s essay below in its entirety. Interspersed throughout the essay are “Comment” and “Share” links which I am leaving intact. Feel free to utilize them but note the links are under the auspices of The Patriot Post and not my blog.

 

JRH 3/21/14

Please Support NCCR

********************************

Obama’s DoD v The Constitution

Suppressing 1st Amendment Religious Expression in the Air Force

 

By Mark Alexander 

Mar. 19, 2014

The Patriot Post

Email Notification Sent: 3/19/2014 1:07 PM

 

“God who gave us life gave us Liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.” –Thomas Jefferson (1774)

 

 

Yet another case of BO’s D-O-D v G-O-D…

 

During the rancorous debates that preceded passage of the 2014 DefenseUSAFA Free Thinkers ad - Ask an Atheist Day budget – the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 – one of the proposed amendments was designed to protect the First Amendment rights of members of the Armed Services.

 

The NDAA as signed by Barack Hussein Obama in December of 2013 included an amendment based on the protective rights language proposed by Rep. John Calvin Fleming (R-LA). Regarding that amendment, Fleming noted: “The conscience rights of our men and women in uniform and their chaplains must be protected. While existing protections have focused on their beliefs, my amendment will extend that protection to the liberty granted by the U.S. Constitution, namely the freedom to exercise those beliefs in speech and actions. This amendment is aimed at stopping the unjust threats and reprimands against service members who have been speaking or acting in accord with their deeply held beliefs, while ensuring that military necessity and readiness are not compromised.”

 

Indeed, Section 532 of the NDAA, the “Enhancement of protection of rights of conscience of members of the Armed Forces and chaplains of such members,” was implemented as a first step toward achieving that goal.

 

Last week, however, the Air Force Academy, with a little help from perennial atheist agitator Mikey Weinstein, tested the protection of those rights. Recall that Weinstein heads the “Military Religious Freedom Foundation,” or what would be more aptly named the “Military Freedom From Religion Foundation.” (Other Service Academies are not burdened with Weinstein because he has made the AFA his testing ground for atheist challenges.)

 

One of Weinstein’s resident cadre of campus atheists complained to the Academy’s Superintendent, Lt. Gen. Michelle Johnson, about a Bible verse posted on a Cadet’s dorm door whiteboard: “I have been crucified with Christ, and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me…” (Gal. 2:20) Those erasable whiteboards are on all Cadet doors, and they are used for personal messages and statements. There is no AFA restriction on what can be posted on them, and Cadets have a respectful understanding of what might be offensive to others – which most assuredly should not include a Bible verse.

That notwithstanding, it was promptly “suggested” to the Cadet that he remove the Bible verse, even though such posts are common.

 

Johnson claimed in an official statement, “The scripture [on the Cadet’s door] could cause subordinates to doubt the leader’s religious impartiality.”

 

Really?

 

On Tuesday of this week, a Cadet with the same leadership rank and position in his squadron as the Cadet who posted the Bible verse on his dorm door, invited the entire Cadet Wing, both in a public announcement to the Wing assembled and by official AFA email, to the “Ask and Atheist Day” event. The event flyer was advertised all week on Academy bulletin screens.

 

So, are we to believe then that promoting atheism to the entire Cadet Wing through official channels does not raise doubts about “the leader’s religious impartiality”?

 

The Cadets who contacted me about the atheist event indicated that they were not objecting to the promotion of that event, but to the hypocrisy of that promotion, versus a fellow Cadet being asked to remove a Bible verse from his door. Obviously, only the Christian expression of faith is the target of AFA discrimination, and it is Johnson’s “religious impartiality” which should be in contention.

 

AFA Cadet White Boards with Scriptures

 

Of note, Johnson’s press release stated, “While we swear an oath to Support and Defend the Constitution of the United States, Airmen are also bound by [Air Force Instruction 1-1].” (Shouldn’t that read “Airpersons”?) Instruction 1-1 is a regulation put into place in 2009 by Obama’s DoD administrators to suppress religious speech.

 

Johnson’s reference to “swear an oath” is ironic, given that, as The Patriot Post first reported last year, somebody at the AFA removed the words “So Help Me God” from the Officer and Enlisted Oaths in the AFA’s official handbook. Those words were removed in 2010 and are still AWOL from the current handbook – in violation of federal statutes and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

 

My column, “End Run on ‘So Help Me God’,” details this omission, and the matter is now the subject of a Freedom of Information Act inquiry to determine who removed those words and why. (I bet Mikey Weinstein’s name pops up.) Suffice it to say that removing “So Help Me God” from official oaths is a far more egregious offense than the current dispute over the Bible verse, but both fall into the same category of faith suppression. However, we may never get an answer given that “the most transparent administration” has stonewalled far more FOIA requests than any other administration.

 

Comment | Share

 

Regarding the whiteboard Bible verse, Weinstein told Fox News that it “clearly elevated [fundamentalist Christianity] over all others at an already virulently hyper-fundamentalist Christian institution.” He added, “It massively poured fundamentalist Christian gasoline on an already raging out-of-control conflagration of fundamentalist Christian tyranny, exceptionalism and supremacy at USAFA. You cannot put a picture in front of your room of a white person whipping a black person. You can’t put a picture of anything that’s denigrating outside your room.”

 

Got that? Posting a passage from the Bible on one’s personal whiteboard is akin to posting a picture “of a white person whipping a black person.” (Shades of Joseph Goebbels in Weinstein’s über -hyperbolic rhetoric.)

 

Former spec ops commander Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin (USA Ret.) says, “The very troops who defend our religious freedom are at risk of having their own taken away. The worst thing we can do is to stop Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines, especially the chaplains, from the free exercise of their faith. … If a scripture scares [the AFA administrators] this much, then [some of those they are training] may not be very effective when confronted by a committed enemy who is willing to die for his or her beliefs. This academy should be training warriors. Scripture is hardly a threat.”

 

 

The AFA’s leadership malfeasance spilled over into Air Force budgetA.F. Secretary Deborah Lee James & A.F. Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh testimony before Congress last Friday, with both Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James and Air Force Chief of Staff General Mark Welsh being asked for a detailed explanation of why the AFA is suppressing religious expression. Reps. Doug Lamborn (R-CO), Joe Wilson (R-SC), Michael Turner (R-OH), Mike McIntyre (D-NC) and Randy Forbes (R-VA) pressed for answers.

 

Lamborn noted, “The Air Force Academy is in my district, and … I’m very disturbed by what happened with this Cadet. I think it’s a suppression of religious rights.” He has written a letter of protest to Johnson, noting, “We are asking future officers to perhaps give even their very lives to protect and defend the Constitution and yet denying them rights from that same Constitution.”

 

As Forbes put it to Sec. James, “Can you imagine a young Cadet when he’s forced with the entire chain of command coming in there and telling him basically this is inappropriate?” He objected further, “Perhaps most offensive, the Air Force said this was a teaching moment, that the Cadet’s action of putting the Bible verse on [the whiteboard] was inappropriate based on leadership principles.”

 

Forbes then asked Gen. Welsh, “What other inspirational quotes have Cadets been forced to remove from their personal whiteboards other than verses from the Bible?”

 

Welsh insisted the “single biggest frustration I’ve had in this job is the perception that somehow there is religious persecution in the United States Air Force.” He added, “We remove hundreds of quotes from those boards. … You have to get the facts right on every one of these cases.”

 

Now, I’ve met Gen. Welsh, and I found him to be in possession of strong character and leadership qualities – and a devoted Christian. But if he’s been told that the AFA has removed “hundreds of quotes from those boards,” I for one would like to see the evidence of those removals, preferably without issuing another FOIA request. According to a response I received from Gen. Welsh regarding the issue of “So Help Me God” being removed from the AFA’s official handbook, he was told that was “a printing error on a wall calendar,” not an obvious omission from the handbook.

 

Memo to Gen. Welsh: You can’t “get the facts right” if somebody at the AFA is feeding you misinformation.

 

Comment | Share

 

So what now?

 

To ratchet up the stakes, some AFA Cadets are standing their ground in protest by posting this offensive note on their door whiteboards: “IN GOD WE TRUST”. By “offensive,” I mean an offensive strategic move to challenge the culture of religious suppression at the AFA. (The Patriot Post is offering 4″x6″ stickers with our flag over the words “IN GOD WE TRUST” free of charge to Cadets at any service academy. E-mail GodTrust@PatriotPost.US to inquire about obtaining quantities of these stickers.)

 

US Flag - In God We Trust

 

Of course, Mikey Weinstein is furious: “This is an absolutely horrible, shameful disgrace. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such an open rebellion like this happening at any military academy. It’s like they’re sticking their middle finger up at what the academy did.”

 

Will AFA Superintendent Johnson demand our National Motto be removed from her Cadets’ doors?

 

If so, a religious Liberty coalition, including the Family Research Council, the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Liberty Counsel, the Liberty Institute and the Thomas More Law Center, announced they will provide legal defense for any Cadet brought up on charges.

 

Liberty Institute attorney Mike Berry believes the AFA actions are a direct violation of Section 532 of the NDAA as noted previously, saying, “If the Cadet didn’t violate any rules, then why was the quote removed? … This is not only morally wrong, it’s illegal. … We met with Col. Paul Barzler, the Air Force Academy Staff Judge Advocate [and] pointed out that under the Constitution, federal law, and military regulations, Cadets have the right to religious exercise. I was shocked when he responded that [according to Obama’s DoD policy] the term ‘religious exercise’ does not include written or verbal speech.”

 

Personally, I’m not sure why anyone would be shocked at any directive from the Obama administration.

 

Under the pretense of “religious tolerance,” Obama’s administration has been advancing his mandate to remove all expressions of faith from government forums. This eradication serves the Left’s strategic objective of replacing Rule of Law with the rule of men – because the former is predicated on the principle of Liberty “endowed by our Creator,” while the latter asserts that Liberty is the gift of government.

 

Stand your ground, Cadets!

 

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus et Fidelis

___________________________

© 2014, The Patriot Post.

 

About The Patriot Post

 

The Patriot Post is a highly acclaimed advocate of Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. We believe, as did our Founders, that Essential Liberty, and Rule of Law as enshrined in our Constitution, must be defended at any cost. “They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” (Ben Franklin) · “A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.” (John Adams) · “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” (Thomas Jefferson) · “If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.” (Thomas Paine) · “It does not take a majority to prevail…but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. … If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!” (Samuel Adams) · “Give me liberty or give me death!” (Patrick Henry) · “Our cause is noble; it is the cause of mankind!” (George Washington)

 

The Patriot Post — inspired byREAD THE REST

 

From Email Version:

 

The Patriot Post is protected speech pursuant to the “unalienable rights” of all men, and the First (and Second) Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. In God we trust. Copyright © 2014 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

 

REPRINTING, FORWARDING AND POSTING: Subscribers may reprint, forward or post original content from The Patriot Post, in whole or part, in accordance with our Terms of Use, with the following citation: “The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/)”

Are YOU a Bigot if YOU Hate Islam?


Mahdi Antichrist

John R. Houk

© November 25, 2013

 

Here come the accusations of hater and bigot.

 

Islam is an evil religion. Its adherents love to call their faith the religion of peace. That is a bit of a deceptive moniker. There are a lot of Quranic suras that indeed extol peace and family; however an equal or greater amount of Islamic theology extols violence to those who refuse to submit to allah or to those who insult allah and the antichrist prophet Mohammed. The verbal anger in the newest suras of the Quran reflect Mohammed’s frustration of being rejected as a prophet by Jews and Christians. The rejection is easy to understand. Mohammed goes from calling the People of the Book (i.e. the Torah and Bible) as people to be respected as receiving – cough – allah’s revelations first to calling Jews and Christians as evil twisted deceivers of allah’s word who corrupted scripture ensuring their place in hell. So if you happen to see a Jew hiding then kill’em.

 

And so although I believe those who call themselves Muslims may be decent and upright in character kind-of-people, their theology when honored as pure is evil toward non-Muslims (aka kafir).

 

As an American devoted to the Freedom and Rights inherent in the First Amendment I have struggled with Islam as being a religion that should be freely practiced in the USA.

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Bold Emphasis Mine - 1st Amendment to U.S. Constitution)

 

Americans are guaranteed to not have an established religion by the government AND Americans are guaranteed that the government will not prohibit the free exercise of religion. So how do Constitutional honoring Americans who are not Muslims deal with a religion in which a part of its theology is to transform the social-political nature of nature by force if necessary. In other words a devoted Muslim would not be off base towards his faith to fight against the U.S. Constitution as the basis for the rule of law by changing the legal foundation to Sharia Law. Sharia Law stands against everything the U.S. Constitution stands and in particular Sharia Law is a contradiction to the Constitution’s Bill of Rights (Amendments 1 – 10).

 

In Islam there is no Religious Freedom because Islam is supreme and the non-Muslim is an insult.

 

In Islam there is no Free Speech because if Islam, its deity allah and/or its prophet Mohammed are insulted punishment must follow up to and including the death penalty.

 

In Islam Non-Muslims cannot assemble peaceably especially to worship their faith openly because that would be an insult to the supremacy of Islam – punishment will follow.

 

If non-Muslims petition the government with a grievance that might be contrary to Sharia Law it would be considered an effrontery to Islam – punishment will follow.

 

AND this just addresses the First Amendment!

 

Islam is a religion that is beyond an individual seeking the spiritual answers to that which is divine. Islam is an ideological-political religion that absolutely demands the government to enforce the precepts of Islam as derived from the Quran, Hadith and Sira (Sunna). When you here a Muslim inform you that their Quran claims there is no compulsion of religion in Islam – it is a deception. If one chooses to retain their non-Muslim faith and are lucky enough to be a member of the People of the Book, you are not compelled to convert to Islam. The deception is – especially in a Muslim dominated nation – your life is made a living hell of humiliation and religious taxation that only the most ardent non-Muslims choose not to convert. That is how the Christian Middle East and North Africa changed from a Christian majority into a Muslim majority. Converting to Islam removed 2nd class humiliation status to the Muslim family of the Umma. So always remember the ‘Islam is Peace’ and ‘there is no compulsion of religion in Islam’ are deceptions meant to entice the kafir to enter Islam.

 

It is thus my opinion that Islam that adheres to a purist belief – i.e. an original loyalty to the early meanings of Islamic theology – should be banned in America as not a religion but as a political element dedicated to the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution. Frankly such a reform for Muslim-Americans is something they will not stomach. Just as Christians are taught the Bible is Holy and Jews are taught the Torah is Holy, Muslims are taught that the Quran is the irrefutable word of allah (what they call god). The difference for Jews and Christians is that our theology tells to submit to the ruling authorities as appointed by God even if they are heathen because the political authority is the instrument that administers right over wrong in society. If you do no wrong then there should be a peaceful life. Contrarily Islamic theology is to fight the kafir until they submit or fool the kafir until the Ummah is strong enough to force kafir to submit. Jews and Christians pray for peace. Muslims force submission to enfranchise an Islamic Supremacist peace. The Islamic political nature is contrary to the U.S. Constitution.

 

So I advocate a ban on any Islamic theology that is politically motivated to utilize violence to achieve the ends of destroying the U.S. Constitution. This is where the hater and bigot accusations should really begin to fly.

 

There is an essence of truth to the accusations. As a Christian I can say without any remorse that Islam is an antichrist religion. Islam denies the Sonship and Godhood of Jesus Christ. The New Testament specifically tells Christians that such a belief is an antichrist spirit. HOWEVER, the New Testament also teaches us to love our enemies and to pray for those who persecute you.  So I can confidently say I hate Islam the theo-political religion but I pray for the peace and Salvation of all Muslim adherents.

 

Allow me to briefly switch gears on you. I have a different perspective on Jews. In Christian history Jews have often been vilified as Christ-Killers. Merely that sentiment alone would make Judaism an antichrist religion. HOWEVER, Christians forget that Christ came first to the lost sheep of Israel. At the Resurrection the disciples wondered if this was the time that Israel would be restored the Lord Jesus told them to the effect not yet and then gave last instructions to go into all the world witness of Jesus Christ first to “…Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” (Matt. 28: 18-20; Mk.16: 15-16; Acts 1: 6-8). The ONLY Christians when Jesus spoke to his disciples were indeed Jews. God’s Promises are to the Jews. Salvation is of the Jews. When non-Jews receive Christ Jesus they are engrafted (NOT REPLACING) into God’s Promises to the Jews. It is my unlearned opinion that although the majority of Jews reject Christ’s Messiahship now, there will be a time when they embrace Jesus. Remember the Twelve Apostles did not immediately believe Jesus Christ arose from the dead and the Apostle Thomas was the last hold-out in that non-belief. I believe the Jews of today are the modern doubting Thomases that will believe when they see the return of King Jesus. So I honor Jews as the Chosen People rather than as Christ-killers.

 

Now what was it that got me thinking about Islam and the U.S. Constitution and First Amendment Religious Freedom?

 

I subscribe to Sharia Unveiled. One of my favorite blogs has come across some information that the nation of Angola (western neighbor of Congo, Zambia & Namibia) has banned Islam from being legal. The government has even taken the step of destroying Mosques in Angola. Now it being Africa I suspect this will not be a non-violent situation in Angola.

 

The Angola government has had a Marxist-Leninist domination from about the 1970s. Apparently Angola place a new Constitution in 1991 and again 2002 that changed the government into a multiparty system; however elections seem plagued by corruption. The (Marxist) Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) has been the primary power holder since Angolan independence from Portugal in 1975. There had been an Angolan civil war off and on especially in the old Cold War days of the USSR vs. USA. As the word “Marxist” implies the Communism á la Marxist-Leninism was the dominant rule of law factor in Angola. Meaning not friendly to religion. Apparently after 2002 (and beyond) the still dominant MPLA eased up religious intolerance under an official democratic socialism rather than a Marxist dictatorship. However the way the Angolan Constitution is framed almost absolute power is vested into the Office of President. The President is chosen by the majority party in Parliament.

 

The power structure is important to understand the ability of the government to move against the Muslim minority of Angola. The Marxist influence the quarter century inspired the Angolan government to move against the legality of Islam when it determined that al Qaeda began using its influence among the 80-90 thousand Muslims via NGOs. So in Angola Islam is illegal to keep Radical Islam out. The only problem I have with this Angolan move is that if the government reverts back to an anti-religion policy that would include the shutdown of all religions in the despotic nation.

 

JRH 11/25/13

Please Support NCCR

******************************************

Angola has ordered the shutdown of all mosques and declared Islam illegal.  Becomes the first nation in the world to issue a ban on Islam.

 

Posted by Sharia Unveiled

Posted on November 25, 2013

By Umm Ayoub

Originally Ajib – France

President Jose Eduardo dos Santos of Angola

 

President Jose Eduardo dos Santos of Angola

 

The fight against Islam does not seem to be exclusive to westerners.  According to the African press, Angola is determined to eradicate Islam from its territory.

 

Thus Muslims Luanda saw their mosque being destroyed.  The municipality of the town was radically breaking the only mosque in the city. Just days later, this is the Mosque of Viana was reduced to dust.

 

VIDEO: Angola Bans Islam and Shuts Down All Mosques

 

To excuse these unjust acts, the governor of the city said that the government of the country was not ready to legalize the construction of mosques. Similarly, earlier this week, the Minister of Culture, Rosa Cruz e Silva said: “With regard to Islam, the legalization process has not been approved by the Ministry of Justice and Human Man, their mosques will be closed until further notice. ”

 

Now the main task of the Angolan government would destroy all the mosques located in the country because their status is considered “illegal”. This “illegal” status is further enhanced by the fact that the Muslim religion is considered contrary to the customs and the habits of the country. Therefore, leaders want the ban at all costs.

 

Although the proportion of Muslims is small, it prevents our Angolan brothers are suffering from this anti-Islam political regime. Allah assists and facilitates the Hijra!

 

A report has been issued stating the following:

 

“The legalisation of Islam has not been approved by the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights [and] their mosques will be closed until further notice,” said minister of culture Rosa Cruz e Silva.

 

The minister called Islam a “sect” which would be banned as counter to Angolan customs and culture.

 

Following the ban, there were unconfirmed reports that mosques across the vast southern African nation were being destroyed.

 

“This is the final end of Islamic influence in our country,” President Jose Edurado dos Santos told the Osun Defence daily.

 

Muslims account for less than 1% of the population of 19 million, while more than half of this former Portuguese colony subscribe to Christianity.

 

Clashes between the two communities are frequently reported in the local media. Muslims, many of whom migrated from west Africa and Lebanon, often face hostility from lawmakers in Angola.

 

Along with Islam, 194 other “sects” have been outlawed.

 

“Besides these, there is a long list of more than 1,000 applications to be authorised,” said Silva.

 

__________________________________

Are YOU a Bigot if YOU Hate Islam?

John R. Houk

© November 25, 2013

________________________________

Angola has ordered the shutdown of all mosques and declared Islam illegal.  Becomes the first nation in the world to issue a ban on Islam.

 

Sharia Unveiled About Page

 

  TRUTH! 

 

…in a word, that is what sharia unveiled is about.

 

sharia unveiled is committed to seeking and sharing the truth.  In all things, there is only one truth.  There is no “middle ground” in truth.  There is no “compromise” in truth and there is no “tolerance” in truth.  There is no “leuke warm” in truth.  There are no “grey areas” in truth.  Truth is black and white.  Wrong or Right.  There is truth and everything else is just a lie.

 

We live in this world although we are not of it.

 

We live in a world of darkness, lies and deception.  We live in a world that protects, defends and rewards those who lie.  Why?  Primarily due to the fact that faith is being forced out of the world and evil is being invited in.  When we force God out essentially, we are creating a vacuum in society.  We are creating a void of empty space and the natural tendency is for that space to be filled.  The door has been left open and evil has been invited in.  Evil comes in many forms although rarely does it present itself as evil.  In most cases, it hides itself beneath a cloak of deception and a pretty name.  Sometimes evil even hides beneath the facade of “Peace and Love.”

 

We are dedicated to human rights.

 

sharia unveiled is absolutely and unequivocally devoted to the protection and defense of human rights.  There are READ THE REST

The Season is Emerging to Battle Against Christianity


Birth of Christ - Nativity Scene

John R. Houk

© October 12, 2013

 

There has been an open war by Leftists and atheists on Christianity for some time in the USA. Thanks to Madalyn Murray O’Hair (focus on Communist Connection), the Supreme Court reinterpreted the Establishment (or is it Disestablishment [Full PDF of link]) Clause of the First Amendment to go beyond preventing the government from establishing a State Church but to include that anything representative of taxpayer money must exclude Christianity. The annual Christmas period of the year is when this war on Christianity seems to rear up on a national basis in the media. Hence the war on Christianity becomes the war on Christmas.

 

Too many Corporations (AFA 2012 Naughty or Nice List) operate stores that have fallen prey to the concept that it is politically incorrect to promote Christmas because it promotes Christianity. AND any promotion of Christianity might be offensive to a minority of people in the USA that would prefer to distant themselves from any open association with Christianity; e.g. atheists, Muslims, Jews and perhaps other identifiable anti/non-Christian entities. This PC marketing is idiotic and an insult to the majority of Americans that relish the Christmas season as a time of giving, compassion and just a downright period of joy. I mean Americans who are not particularly religiously observant of the Christian faith still make this a time of family get together and enjoy an interruption from the daily tasks of the old J-O-B.

 

Corporations do have a Constitutional right to utilize whatever marketing strategy they deem fit; however as a Christian I find it nauseating when Christianity is the focus of diminishment to accommodate some foolish PC concept of multicultural diversity. Even more nauseating though is when Leftists and atheists impose their sanitized and/or ungodly beliefs on those that embrace Christianity via the taxpayer support Public venues. The imposition is exacted by using “Living Constitution” (Constitutionalist Criticism) parameters rather than “Original Intent” (In support of Original IntentNeutral Explanation) parameters in the Constitution to make sure the bedrock of America’s morality is not supported whatsoever. The result of this legal ploy of redefining the meaning of the Constitution has successfully turned America into which families are divided, single parent families are as common as heterosexual families, homosexuals are allowed to raise children further warping the societal fabric and a host of other deviations I am certain you can think of that escape my memory as of this writing.

 

The result of this moral dilution in America’s family unit has led to a society in which public dishonesty overrules the decency of honesty, children need protected on their routes to and from school, armed guards are becoming common place on Public School grounds, children bring weapons to harm others singularly or on a multiple basis, children are told they cannot play traditional play acting any longer (such as cops and robbers, cowboys and Indians, etc.) because imaginary weapons may inspire real weapons, childhood aggression is increasingly common (such as bullying – physical or cyber), underage children – most often teenagers – are increasingly enabled on a parental level to participate in rabble-rousing partying that includes drinking, sex, property destruction, drugs, teen pregnancy and MORE.

 

These societal behaviors are a direct result of the Leftist and atheistic assault to prevent Christianity from being an integral part of American Culture in the name of Multicultural Diversity.

 

The first anti-Christmas story I heard this was a Public School imposing restrictions on an annual High School Christmas Carol Concert due to concerns of a phrase that is found NO WHERE in the Constitution called Separation of Church and State. Here is a good synopsis of how this anti-Christmas story developed:

 

The state of Wisconsin once again sits center stage in the War on Christmas. The Wausau School District has issued an edict about Christmas music that has caused several school associated music groups to either disband or cancel December performances.

 

Phil Buch, who has directed Wausau West High School’s choral programs since 1981, said the decision to halt rehearsals for the Master Singers was made after a meeting Thursday with district officials and Frank Sutherland, an attorney who represents the school district.

 

Buch said district administrators gave music educators at Wausau schools three options for December concerts, which typically contain a significant amount of religious music: choose five secular, or non-religious, songs for each religious song performed; hold a concert and have no holiday music whatsoever; or postpone any concerts in December. Because the 20-member Master Singers group is invited to sing at nearly a dozen holiday concerts each year, Buch said, those options were unacceptable.

 

“This group sings at Christmas programs,” Buch said. “We sing for nursing homes, grade schools, businesses. To do that without Christmas music doesn’t make sense.”

 

District administrators did not return calls Friday seeking information about the rules, but Wausau School Board President Michelle Schaefer said the change in direction stems from legal concerns over the amount of religious music performed in the schools. The decision will not eliminate religious music altogether but will give teachers a better idea as to how much religious music is “too much,” Schaefer said.

 

“From a School Board perspective, we look for music that is balanced,” Schaefer said. “Yes, we are a predominantly Christian society, but we are also a society of many faiths, and we want to respect that.”

 

(Wisconsin School District Cancels Christmas; By Editor; Defend Christmas; 10/6/13)

 

I actually first heard this story on Fox News but the below story is an excellent synopsis. This first shot over the bow against Christmas has an early victorious ending. Evidently once this story went viral the School Board relented on this attack on the Christian faith. Here is a story I found about this victory in Jesus.

 

JRH 10/12/13

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Wisconsin Christmas Music Battle Goes Viral; Students Claim Victory

 

By Kallsign Snoopy

October 11, 2013

Kallsign Snoopy’s Hamshack

 

We reported the story last Sunday — the media ran with it Tuesday. By Wednesday Freedom From Religion Foundation got in on the act. It appears to be the first big national story in the War on Christmas 2013.

 

In an update after a late Thursday meeting with the school district students and parents are claiming victory and that the Christmas concerts are now back on — with traditional Christmas music put back in place.

 

Here’s the issue: without warning the choir director at West High School in Wausau, Wisconsin was called to discuss plans for the upcoming music events to be held in December. It was reported early on that Wausau schools three options for December concerts, which typically contain a significant amount of religious music: choose five secular, or non-religious, songs for each religious song performed; hold a concert and have no holiday music whatsoever; or postpone any concerts in December. The choir director was outraged and in response he opted not only to cancel concerts — he disbanded the music groups who would traditionally perform.

 

The school district claims it is merely making sure they don’t violate the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution (because educators in Wisconsin have SUCH a great track record with constitutional issues). They also say now they never came up with the plan to perform a certain amount of secular songs for every religious song performed. They claim that was a “misunderstanding”.

 

Needless to say, as with many battles we’ve seen before about Christmas in public schools, this one too will end with someone being very unhappy.

 

 

Freedom from Religion Foundation president Annie Laurie Gaylor claims no responsibility in this latest fight but was quick to pitch in with FFRF’s support of the school district:

 

“There can be a fine line, and we understand in some instances there can be sacred classical music in the schools, but it’s so easy for something like this to turn into a message of indoctrination. When you have a chorus going out to 15 places to sing religious music, it really does give the appearance that the school is celebrating Christianity.”

 

Yes, Christianity as gained so many converts over the decades by going to nursing homes to sing “Silent Night”.

 

The tip off of a problem was that the school choir director met with school district officials with an attorney present. In other words, they were ready for a fight.

 

According to a story on The Blaze tonight, the choir director at West High is known for his religious nature.

 

All this intense attention to the issue appears to have been resolved as of late Thursday. The Wausau School District has backed off on the requirements and have left the decision of local program content to school principals.

 

The crux of the issue comes down to this: when a school group performs Christmas music with religious themes does it in fact constitute promotion of that religion? The “establishment clause” prohibits the “establishment”…does a school group singing actually do that?

 

Oh, and by the way, where exactly in the Constitution is the establishment clause?

 

Another silly chapter in the War on Christmas.

 

(I am glad that this all got cleared up but I really wish people would get it through their heads that there is no such thing as an “establishment” clause. There is a “Government shall make no law” clause. And it only applies to the Congress. Leave my Christmas alone! If you don’t like it, don’t celebrate it. Just don’t ruin it for everyone else!

 

Publius)

___________________________

The Season is Emerging to Battle Against Christianity

John R. Houk

© October 12, 2013

________________________

Wisconsin Christmas Music Battle Goes Viral; Students Claim Victory

 

Retired warrior, Full time pilot, Part time political blogger. Always a Patriot. Amateur Radio Operator - MORE

 

What to do when the Muslim Minority Assaults Non-Muslim Majority?


Muslim Violence forecast France

John R. Houk

© August 26, 2013

 

My friend Justin Smith via Facebook sent a video of this blonde French gal railing on her French government for doing absolutely zero to protect French people from the racist hatred of Muslims in France being executed in violence against White French people.

 

She describes an email she received describing how a French family was accosted by Muslims. The six months pregnant wife was pelted with stones while working in her own garden. Eventually she lost that baby with the cause being stated as STRESS.

 

The French family’s home was ransacked several times including twice in one day. The blonde gal says the police would not respond to the crimes because this family lives in an “unsafe zone” within their own nation.

 

One of the largest concentration of Muslims in America is in the Detroit metropolitan area – specifically Dearborn. Can you imagine Muslims attacking non-Muslims in this once car making home just because of their Christian beliefs? Guess what. That has happened!

 

VIDEO: Arab Festival 2010: Dearborn Police Defending Islam against the Constitution

 

A Christian group makes annual visit to Dearborn exercising their First Amendment Right of Religious Freedom to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ during a community festival. In the past the Dearborn police actually illegally made the Christians leave. In one case the Christian group was actually attacked by Muslim by the pelting of bottles and cans. The police did not protect the Christians but rather informed them their presence was inciting violence. WHAT! The event was and is public! Is America under United Nations rule that we are prohibited to exercise our Religious Freedom if doing so is insulting to Muslims? THAT IS CRAZY UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

 

The below video is 22 minutes long but you get the idea of Sharia in America in just the first two or three minutes:

 

VIDEO: American Muslims Stone Christians in Dearborn, MI (Original edit)

 

The Muslim violence epidemic affecting the French in their home within the framework of French Culture breeds fear for the French. The Dearborn example demonstrates that this plague in France is gaining a toe-hold in America. Do we want to allow this to happen in American because of the fallacy of Leftist Multiculturalism – protect the Muslim and persecute the Christian to make Muslims feel welcome? I say NO!

 

Clarity needs to be brought out that Religious Freedom does not mean violence against another religion is okay if the other religion is insulted. Of course that works both ways. Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus or even atheists should not attack Muslims due to their religious beliefs. Oops … I have not heard of such action since the days of the Ku Klux Klan White Supremacists attacking Black Churches in the South. This is the 21st century and that does not occur anymore.

 

When minority Muslims in the West (like France, America, UK and other nations) can attack with impunity because their Islamic Supremacism tells them they have the right to attack non-Muslims disrespecting Islam and the police structure allows such violence to occur, then we have a problem. If the problem is not solved immediately eventually there will be religious strife that will take on the picture of racial violence as the inherent culture becomes weary of unhinged Muslim violence against non-Muslims. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that hot heads will gather a following of wronged people or families by Islamic Supremacism within the native culture.

 

The Law of the Land must step in now even if there is a time of violence by recalcitrant Muslims until barriers are established that violence due to any religious beliefs will not be tolerated.

 

Below is that Blonde French Gal that touches on these issues passionately. Even though she speaks in French it is worth it to read the subtitles and match it to the emotion she is displaying. And even though she rails on the French government she finishes with Vive le France. Typically I am not a fan of the French because of the portrayal of an anti-American attitude; however in this case her emotion moves me to join Blondie –Vive le France!

 

JRH 8/26/13 (Hat Tip: Justin Smith)

Please Support NCCR

**************************************

Blonde of Youtube: “The time for talk is over”

 

Posted by Ban Koran

Published on Aug 23, 2013

_________________________

Transcript via Gates of Vienna

 

“The Time for Talk is Over”

Posted August 23, 2013 10:38 PM

Posted by Baron Bodissey

 

“The Blonde” returns with a few choice words aimed at Interior Minister Manuel Valls, and an appalling story about the treatment meted out by culture-enrichers to a young “person of French background” in the north of France.

 

Many thanks to Oz-Rita for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

 

[Editor: This where Gates of Vienna inserts their copy of the video.]

 

Transcript:

 

00:02

 

Firefighters, police attacked.

00:06

 

suburbs freedom of expression censored

00:10

 

anti-white racism. Socialist Justice.

00:14

 

Dhimmitude. Apology for Communism.

00:18

 

Replacement of our Population.

00:22

 

France and her flag insulted.

00:26

 

Don’t touch our freedom of expression. Don’t touch my national anthem.

00:30

 

Don’t stone firefighters. Stop religious riots.

00:34

 

Blonde of YouTube

00:46

 

CouCou

00:50

 

Today a somewhat different video. Firstly,

00:54

 

apologies for the sound quality.

00:58

 

I’ll explain what’s going on.

01:02

 

Two weeks ago I received a worrying email asking me

01:06

 

for help, because he had big problems.

01:10

 

I responded, but

01:14

 

no more than that, as I get such messages

01:18

 

by the hundreds regularly.

01:22

 

So, the situation: this young man lives in the North

01:26

 

next to the city of Louches.

01:30

 

On hearing the name of this town

01:34

 

one feels like laughing, but knowing what is happening there,

01:38

 

it’s not funny.

01:42

 

So this young man moved there.

01:46

 

It started with anti-white insults;

01:50

 

it escalated. Three weeks ago his wife

01:54

 

was pelted with stones in her garden

01:58

 

while she was six months pregnant. His little brother

02:02

 

has also been violently attacked.

02:06

 

He intervened, and six of them jumped on him.

02:10

 

Result: both ended in the emergency room.

02:14

 

His house has been ransacked, twice

02:18

 

in two days. They destroyed everything, furniture,

02:22

 

baby things, crockery.

02:26

 

They returned that night to finish the job.

02:31

 

The police don’t come

02:35

 

because the district is too dangerous.

02:39

 

Social services and city hall know about it.

02:43

 

The police know about it.

02:47

 

But nobody does anything.

02:51

 

So he called me for help, because his wife,

02:55

 

with all this stress, just lost her baby

02:59

 

yesterday.

03:03

 

Labor was induced this morning.

03:07

 

Her baby was stillborn

03:11

 

because of all this stress

03:15

 

and the incapacity of our government.

03:19

 

I find this revolting,

03:23

 

because they have no idea of the situation

03:27

 

of these people. There are thousands of people like this,

03:31

 

but Mr. Valls [Manuel Valls, interior minister] fights Islamophobia instead.

03:35

 

I ask myself: what

03:39

 

if the wife of this man had been called “Fatima”?

03:43

 

You can imagine the huge reaction this would have caused

03:47

 

in all the (despicable) media.

03:51

 

We would have heard about it everywhere.

03:55

 

But as the victim was merely a little French whitey, no worries.

03:59

 

I am really outraged.

04:03

 

I am close to exploding, when I see Mr. Valls

04:07

 

call us Islamophobes:

04:11

 

stop the bulls***! What does Mr. Valls do for all these people

04:15

 

who live in and next to these cities,

04:19

 

who cannot go out in peace? What does he do for our police?

04:23

 

What does he do for our firefighters?

04:27

 

Nothing at all!

04:31

 

Except protect HIS police,

04:35

 

his political police, you know the ones I’m talking about.

04:39

 

I’m speaking of the “Antifa” [extreme left groups].They consider us

04:43

 

Fachos [Fascists].

04:47

 

“Fachos” because we love our country

04:51

 

as it used to be. We are called Fascists.

04:55

 

3/4 of us have no criminal record (as they do),

05:00

 

but it is we who are dangerous fascists.

05:04

 

It’s time to put things back into order

05:08

 

and DO something, because the time for talk is over.

05:12

 

Do something; send in the Army.

05:16

 

It’s not OK to let women live in fear,

05:20

 

let women lose their children because of stress.

05:24

 

It’s non-assistance to people in danger.

05:28

 

The government does not do its duty.

05:32

 

This has to stop.

05:36

 

If they don’t know, I can explain it to them, I get testimonies,

05:40

 

thousands of them, but

05:44

 

[Valls] couldn’t care less. He is in his beautiful big house, in security.

05:48

 

Mr. Valls is not worried,

05:52

 

nor are all the other clowns in our Government.

05:56

 

A solution must be found quickly. I appeal to lawyers.

06:00

 

I appeal to city hall, the Prefect,

06:04

 

ANYONE! Help this young couple

06:08

 

The young man, I spent more than two hours

06:12

 

on the phone with him. He was in a terrible state;

06:16

 

he was close to suicide. We were several patriots

06:20

 

trying to talk him out of it.

06:24

 

He was also close to going into the city to get himself killed

06:28

 

simply by provoking.

06:32

 

And no, nobody will do anything.

06:36

 

So, stop the bulls*** and do something

06:40

 

and clean up these cities. Stop the blah-blah. Talk fests are nice,

06:44

 

but there is never any action. As I said before:

06:48

 

The time for dialogue is finished.

06:52

 

Either they move, or we are the ones who will move you.

06:56

 

We cannot let people like this get attacked,

07:00

 

end up in hospital, their houses ransacked,

07:04

 

their cars burnt, and we remain silent,

07:08

 

while the police cannot even GO there.

07:12

 

My little sister called me three days ago to tell me

07:16

 

that she was grossly insulted, because she wears the same thing as I around the neck

07:21

 

We are FED UP!

07:25

 

I am angry, and we are all angry.

07:29

 

We try to calm people a little on the net,

07:33

 

but we will not be able to calm them

07:37

 

for ten years.

07:41

 

So, he [Valls] should stop questioning, let him get on the phone and send in the army.

07:45

 

He is not aware of the situation. All he does is…

07:49

 

yes… good… you are Islamophobes,

07:53

 

you don’t love Islam… yeah, that’s it.

07:57

 

Fed up, there are endless problems with Islam.

08:01

 

I am threatened, I am on the wall of the “Antifas”

08:05

 

the ones I call “THEIR” political police. Because their young men

08:09

 

are much more violent than we who are considered fascists.

08:13

 

Why? Because I defend the police, the firefighters

08:17

 

civilians, the army? But it’s YOUR work, not mine;

08:21

 

get your ideas in order

08:25

 

And so…

08:29

 

this crime must not go unpunished.

08:33

 

A baby is dead, a family is destroyed,

08:37

 

and it’s just ONE example among many

08:41

 

So: move! That’s all I have to say on

08:45

 

on this subject. And the next video

08:49

 

we will discuss [inaudible].

08:53

 

I wish you a good day, and Vive la France!

 

 

_________________________________

What to do when the Muslim Minority Assaults Non-Muslim Majority?

John R. Houk

© August 26, 2013

______________________________

Ban Koran” is quite anonymous for obvious reasons relation to the – cough – Religion of Peace.

____________________________

“The Time for Talk is Over”

 

Gates of Vienna Homepage

Tolerance and Pink Assaults on Christians


Christians Don't Change Mind

John R. Houk

© July 8, 2013

 

Homosexual Activists scream for a tolerant society of their abominable lifestyle practice. Homosexuals shout and scream that society recognize their persuasion as normal. AND with the help of the Mainstream Media, Hollywood and Television American culture has nearly been propagandized to accept as normal that which God Almighty condemns as an abomination.

 

AND YET when Christians unite to exercise their Constitutional Right in the public sector so-called homosexual tolerant and compassionate people erupt into a riotous mania ASSAULTING Christian Preachers for holding signs and saying the Biblical stand on a homosexual lifestyle.

 

Check out this Gay Brigade assault that occurred in Seattle in the vicinity of the iconic Space Needle.

 

JRH 7/8/13 (Hat Tip Solid Snake)

Please Support NCCR

*************************************

WILD… Unhinged Lesbian Mob Beats Street Preacher at Seattle Gay Pride

 

Posted by Jim Hoft

July 4, 2013, 1:13 AM

Gateway Pundit

 

PINK MAFIA BEATDOWN–
An unhinged mob of raging lesbians and beer-muscled gays
beat a street preacher (video) at the Seattle Gay Pride festivities this week.

 

We’re here. We’re queer. We’ll beat your a$$.

pink-mafia-beatdown

 

UPDATE: Here is the full unedited brawl at Pride Fest.
(Warning on language and lesbian violence)

 

http://youtu.be/utyiN7g0TkE

 

[SlantRight Editor: The above Youtube link was posted by the actual cameraman that caught the gayzebos violating America’s First Amendment Rights. Below are the words he associated with his video.]

 

Posted by Rogue Reflections

Published on Jul 1, 2013

 

While photographing this event, I witnessed a growing anger from some of the crowd, towards the preachers. All of a sudden a few members in the crowd attacked the street preachers. I switched to video to document the incident. I DO NOT condone what the attackers did. While I don’t agree with these preachers, it is their Constitutional right to be in public and preach. I think it is tragic that some of the people who justifiably want tolerance in their life, deny that same tolerance to others. I commend the responding Seattle PD Officers for the professional way they handled this situation. The main aggressor was arrested.

On a side note: I think it is a testament to the assailants and aggressors that the Seattle PD removes a PBR can and some liquor bottle from the top of the baby buggy this woman has her children in. Where were those children while their caretakers were beating innocent people up?

Update: KOMO News has run my video. It can be seen at:

http://www.komonews.com/news/crime/Vi…

Ok YouTube: This video has gotten WAY bigger than I anticipated. I will no longer have the video set to approve comments. There are just WAY too many. I will not be monitoring comments or responding to them. Any bigotry, racism, and what not, is no longer under my control.

_________________________

Tolerance and Pink Assaults on Christians

John R. Houk

© July 8, 2013

______________________

WILD… Unhinged Lesbian Mob Beats Street Preacher at Seattle Gay Pride

 

© Copyright 2013, TheGatewayPundit.com. All rights reserved.

Find the Church of the St. Bernard


Two Saint Bernard dogs sit in the snow on the Great St. Bernard Pass after returning from their winter quarters in Martigny, Switzerland, Thursday, June 4, 2009. The dogs will spend the summer on the pass and return to Martigny towards the end of the year. (AP Photo/KEYSTONE/Jean-Christophe Bott)

John R. Houk

© June 21, 2013

 

We all know or should know that the Obama Administration is spying on ALL Americans AND has singled Conservatives via Obama’s reach through the IRS to harass their Free Speech by either disenfranchising their cause organizations or to create crimes that are not there for the Justice Department to intimidate Conservative individuals.

 

I just read a post from Bill Warner of Political Islam in which he accuses the Christian Church in America of becoming weak on moral principles. Warner makes a leap by connecting this moral weakness to the power of the IRS to threaten Churches’ 501c3 status. Most Churches in America connect their 501c3 status to their financial viability to operate. According to rules set up by Congress under the misguided concept of Separation of Church and State the IRS is empowered to crack down on any charity, philanthropic venture, religion – LIKE a Christian Church, nonprofit organization that has the purpose of providing an educational agenda – LIKE a Conservative Tea Party, an educate on Islam organization (e.g. showing how Islam is contradictory to the Constitution’s Bill of Rights) and/or even a Left Wing organization dedicated to correcting racist thought patterns, spreading multiculturalism, upholding Marxist principles that Leftists moronically believe will lead to a better society-culture and so forth whatever you can think of AS LONG AS the 501c3 status has nothing to do with a political agenda affecting Federal, State and Local government. Amazingly Left Wing 501c3 organizations that openly support political candidates seem to get a pass.

 

The thing is – who determines the line between educational and politics that effects the operation of government? Incidentally the operation of government in connection to 501c3 status typically means throwing support behind a political candidate for legislative or executive office on a Federal, State or Local level. That determination is broad and usually more stringent toward Churches during a Dem Party Presidential Administration. Unfortunately it occurs during a GOP Presidential Administration when Leftists complain to their Dem Party Senator or Congressman or they find a Left Wing bureaucrat in the IRS. Again unfortunately there are many Left Wing bureaucrats entrenched at all levels of government that are nearly impossible to fire under Civil Service rules.

 

Frankly these 501c3 political guidelines are a bunch of malarkey because they impose Free Speech restrictions and Religious Freedom restrictions in the name of a principle NO WHERE found in the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court began adding rule of law to the First Amendment on Church/State Separation in the early 1900s. In 1947 in a SLIM decision of 5-4 Justice Hugo Black wrote the opinion that SCOTUS has been following ever since. Black’s Opinion:

 

“The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect ‘a wall of separation between Church and State.’” 330 U.S. 1, 15-16. (Bold Emphasis Added)

 

I don’t have a law degree but I know how to read. Jefferson had little to do with writing the Constitution or the Bill of Rights directly. Jefferson’s famous phrasing was in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Church in Connecticut that was concerned of that State’s pre-Constitution days of a State Established Church in which the Baptists were excluded but still had to pay taxes to the State Church. Jefferson was merely emphasizing that the First Amendment forbids the Federal government from establishing a State Church which would be tax supported. The Wall of Separation meant that Christian Denominations no longer had to worry about paying taxes to support a State Church because Congress is forbidden to establish a Church Denomination that is tax supported.

 

Read this well written introduction to the actual letter Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Church:

 

The Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut wrote to President Thomas Jefferson on October 7, 1801, to complain about the infringement of their religious liberty by their state legislature: “what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights: and these favors we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgments, as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen.” The Baptists, of course, acknowledged that “the president of the United States is not the national legislator,” but expressed the wish that his views on religious liberty would “shine and prevail through all these states and all the world.”

 

In his brief response, President Jefferson sympathized with the Connecticut Baptists in their opposition to the state’s established religion, while expressing his reverence for the First Amendment’s “wall of separation between Church & State” at the federal level. Jefferson was not advancing the modern view that religion must be excluded from the public square. After all, he concludes his letter, written in his official capacity as President, with a brief prayer.

 

The now well-known expression lay dormant for nearly a century and a half until Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, in the 1947 case Everson v. Board of Education, put forth the novel interpretation that the First Amendment’s establishment clause applied to the states and that any government support or preference for religion amounts to an unconstitutional establishment of religion. In support of his argument for a radical separation of religion and politics, he cited Jefferson’s metaphor: “[t]he First Amendment has erected a wall of separation between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable.”

 

Jefferson’s actual aim was quite to the contrary. While he, along with James Madison, stoutly opposed established churches as existed in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and other states (while recognizing that, as President, he had to respect them), he was deeply committed to religious liberty. Jefferson’s letter must also be read in context of his declaration in the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom: “Almighty God hath created the mind free….” The “wall of separation” exists to affirm natural rights, including those of faith and religious worship. The “wall” does not imprison the free exercise of religion. Rather, Jefferson sought to prevent the domination of particular sects, making free the religious practices of all. (Bold Emphasis Added; Heritage Foundation – You can read Jefferson’s actual letter after the introduction)

 

The four Justices that disagreed with the majority opinion penned by Hugo Black were Justices Jackson, Frankfurter, Rutledge and Burton. Everson v Board of Education was about reimbursing parents of Catholic students on the taxpayer dime for transportation to Catholic Schools but not to private schools. For clarity the dissenting Justices agreed with Justice Black’s “…the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect ‘a wall of separation between Church and State”. The dissenting Justices were upset that the Majority Opinion viewed taxpayer money for transporting students to Catholic Schools was a public service and not a government affirmation of a religious institution. So if the Majority Opinion viewed using tax money as reimbursement was government support of a religious entity and thus overruled Ewing Township transporting Catholic kids just as Public School kids. The Supreme Court ruling would have been 9-0 and Black’s Jefferson quote would still loom at the end of the opinion and the Supreme Court would have still nullified the Original Intent of the wording of the First Amendment in the Establishment Clause which reads “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” The words simply forbid Congress to establish a national Church. The following words which “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” would indicate no government meddling in religion but the Religious Freedom to provide a moral influence on government and society at large.

 

Thanks to the 1947 SCOTUS ex nihilo expanded meaning to words in the First Amendment from words outside of the First Amendment, Leftist Secular Humanists have continuously used the Courts to water down Christian Morality in American Society. ONLY Congress could make the Constitutional call SCOTUS 1947 performed. AND Congress would be limited to specifically using the Amendment process to add words such as “a wall of separation between Church and State”. Constitutionally the Supreme Court only can say legislation is constitutional or unconstitutional. The U.S. Constitution places legislation – whether it be by the Bill or initiating a Constitutional Amendment – under the purview of Congress.

 

The majority of Christians have failed to stand up and battle Leftists from bleeding Christianity and Biblical Morality out of the United States of America. In this manner Bill Warner is correct. In Christian America Christians attend the Church of the Poodle. American Christians might want to begin looking for the brave and saving Church of the St. Bernard.

 

JRH 6/21/13

Please Support NCCR

*********************************

The Church of the Poodle

 

By Bill Warner

June 17, 2013

Political Islam

 

It appears that the Obama administration is spying on churches and using the IRS to punish churches about their 501c3 tax exempt status (H/T AtlasShrugs). According to the article, the Obama administration has a program of snooping on the activity in and by churches. The collected church intelligence deals with members who are with Tea Party or who speak publically about guns. (Remember: “cling to their guns and Bibles”.) Some ministers believe that agents may have joined churches to spy.

As bizarre as this may seem, it dovetails with other known Obama administration views. Homeland Security has a profile (yes, all law enforcement uses profiling) of the pro-life, pro-gun, pro-Constitution and pro-Bible white Christian as being a potential terrorist.

We do know that the IRS has targeted conservatives, pro-Israel, pro-life, Tea Party and even Billy Graham. When the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association backed the North Carolina ballot initiative about gay marriage, it was notified by the IRS that its tax exempt status was going to be revoked. In the end it was not revoked, but the threat cost money, time and hassle.

All of this has the desired effect of chilling free speech in the churches.

Here is the point: there is no outcry from the churches! This lack of outrage is a measure of the health of Christianity in America-so weak that it cannot even protest the abuse. But, we already knew how morally weak the church is in its response to rape, theft, enslavement and murder of Christians throughout the Islamic world. Christians are the most persecuted demographic group in the world. Over 100,000 thousand Christians died last year, and the response of the churches is to smile and hold a dialog with Muslims who are brothers with the jihadist persecutors. Dhimmi ministers speak of loving their Muslim neighbors, but show no concern for dead Christians. The day of a minister having a Bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other is over. The new gospel is: What, me worry?

Why does the moral and spiritual decay of the church matter to a counter-jihadist? This is a civilizational war and our spiritual flank is unprotected. Instead of the church being a guard dog, it is a poodle. Ministers cannot even protect their own flocks, much less the nation. Back in the past the church was the foundation of the nation and a guardian of our society. But now the church won’t even bark at an enemy-foreign or domestic. All the church wants is a scratch behind the ears by the intruder. (In fairness, only 95% of the churches are being condemned here.) To be complete, the synagogues are a swamp of ignorance and cowardliness, as well.

So, to the counter-jihadist the church is at best a dead weight of massive ignorance and is frequently found in bridge-building dialogues with the enemy-Islam.

_____________________

Find the Church of the St. Bernard

John R. Houk

© June 21, 2013

____________________

The Church of the Poodle

 

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink:
http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/the-church-of-the-poodle/

copyright (c) CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com

© 2007-2013 Political Islam
Use as needed, just give credit and do not edit.

Islam is Political


Rebecca Bynum

 

Islam is Political

Ask Rebecca Bynum

John R. Houk

© June 9, 2013

 

Rebecca Bynum has written a book entitled “Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion”. Bynum is also the editor of the New English Review (NER). The NER has a review of Bynum’s book, but guess what? The NER is a victim of a cyber-attack. I have no doubts the cyber-attack was perpetrated by Muslims that are disenchanted with Free Speech that exposes the political nature of Islam. I believe that is the essential theme of “Allah is Dead”. Which is to say Islam has the trappings of a religion but is practiced with political ideological fervor to achieve political results in laws and culture.

 

I am unsure if there is any legal protection for the NER because I am unsure how enforceable Obama has made U.N. Resolution 16/18 in America in which the First Amendment should trump U.N. international law. If Obama enforces UN Res. 16/18 unconstitutionally then Rebecca Bynum could potentially be charged with hate-speech crimes for – cough – defaming Islam with a title like “Allah is Dead”.

 

So Bynum could potentially criminal charges under international law even though the hate-crime was perpetrated against Bynum and NER with a cyber-attack.

 

Here is an excerpt from the Gates of Vienna on the cyber-attack against NER:

 

New English Review Taken Down by DDOS

[6/5/13]

 

As most readers already know, the New English Review was brought down by a Directed Denial of Service attack (DDOS) during the night. The attack may or may not have been connected with the AFDI rally against sharia, which featured New English Review writers among its speakers.

 

Rebecca Bynum, the editor of NER, just sent us this brief note:

 

For those of you who don’t know yet, after I gave my short speech in Manchester TN last night, New English Review was cyber-attacked and remains down. The attack took out the entire network of sites hosted by ICG Link. They are now moving us to our own private server and will try to get us back up and running as soon as possible. Here is Jerry Gordon’s write-up of the event and my remarks at the AFDI protest on WatchDog Wire, which was very heartening.

 

Some excerpts from the story at WatchDog Wire:

 

Our NER colleague Rebecca Bynum drove down yesterday evening from Nashville to speak at an AFDI protest rally with Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller outside the Manchester — Coffee County Conference Center. The protest rally was scheduled for 5:30 p.m. When she arrived at 5:00 p.m. 150 people were already present, some with posters that read, “Just say no! to Islam” and even a booth selling “Sharia for Non —Muslims”. By the time the program started at 6:30 p.m., the hall was filled to overflowing with an estimated 800 inside according to the local Police Chief. So the Fire Marshall ordered the hall closed.

 

[…]

 

While the audience was disruptive, Bynum told me they were prepared and knowledgeable about Islamic doctrine. One source told of military that came down from Fort Campbell, Kentucky especially to attend this event. Members of the contingent commented to one audience member, “We fought this in the sandbox against Sharia, and we came home to find that it is happening here and now.” Many in the audience were veterans and of a similar cast of mind.

 

US Attorney Killian and FBI Special Agent Moore told the audience that if you defame Islam and engage in hate speech towards Muslims that you will be prosecuted to the fullest. Killian gave a power point presentation on what constituted hate speech under US law. He read off a list of White Supremacist and extremist groups probably provided by the Southern Poverty Law Center as exemplars of who the government was on the lookout for. FBI Special Agent Moore told the audience they were endeavoring to protect Muslim children from hate. At one point he noted that after 9/11 the FBI even hired Muslims as translators to which someone in the audience cried out, “yeah, but you didn’t hire Jews!” Ms. Sabina Mohyuddin, the AMACTN organizer of this event actually told the booing crowd to “shut up and listen to me!” One audience member commented in an email “that was like throwing oil on the fire”.

 

[…]

 

Daring to enforce OIC blasphemy codes under the guise of prosecuting hate speech. Make no bones about it. The heartland of America was outraged last night in Manchester, Tennessee.

 

Watch this Nashville Channel 4 WSMV TV video of the protest at the AMACTN event in Manchester, TN.

 

As you can see from the above report, the FBI and the Department of Justice are already attempting to implement the sharia blasphemy laws laid out by OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, as discussed in an earlier post.

 

The federal fox is not only guarding the American henhouse: he is heating up Read the Rest – very good info!

 

The New English Review is an awesome expose Islam website. I pray the powers that be get it up running again soon. In the meantime here is a 2011 review of “Allah is Dead”. Here is more about a rally in Manchester TN exposing Stealth Jihad in which you can read the text of Rebecca Bynum’s speech. Below is a cross post from a Tea Party Nation social site posted by Jack E. Kemp in which selected excerpts from Rebecca Bynum are posted.

 

Allah is Dead bk jk

 

JRH 6/9/13

Please Support NCCR

***********************************

Rebecca Bynum says Islam is not a religion but a hybrid

 

Posted by Jack E. Kemp

June 9, 2013 at 9:12am

Tea Party Nation

 

Jack E. Kemp

I just began reading Rebecca Bynum’s book “Allah is Dead: Why Islam is not a religion.” I urge you all to read the book, along with myself. The Introduction alone is a brilliant argument worthy of a great article, where it states:

BEGIN QUOTE

…In this book, I take a highly focused look at Islam and whether or not it should rightly be classified or described as a religion, let alone an “Abrahamic religion” or one of the “world’s great religions” as it has been presented.

There is no question, of course, that Muslims themselves believe Islam is a religion. And there is equally no question that Islam harnesses the religious impulse. But it can be argued that communism and Nazism likewise harnessed the religious impulse and that millions of people believed in those ideologies with full religious fervor and devotion. The fact of faith alone does not confer the status of religion on an ideology.

Furthermore, when Islam is analyzed philosophically it reveals itself to be closer to ideologies such as material determinism, nihilism, and even social Darwinism than it is to either Christianity or Judaism…

…The Constitution protects freedom of religion within certain bounds, but to date there had been no Constitutional definition of what actually constitutes a religion in a Judeo-Christian context and America has limited religious practices in the past.

An important precedent was set when Utah was threatened with invasion and federal occupation unless the Mormons living there changed their religious practice of polygamy. Because the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints had a living prophet who could alter the religious tenets of the Church, essentially assigning polygamy to the afterlife, this change was made possible and Utah entered the Union after polygamy was officially banned in the territory. The Mormon Church now has protection under the religious liberty clause, but it did not while the church sanctioned and its members practiced polygamy…

…Polygamy is not marriage and should never be allowed protection under the idea of freedom of religion. There is little chance, however, that Islam will be changed to allow it to fit in with normal Western customs the way Mormonism was changed. A brochure distributed by the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, Tennessee, extols the supremacy of polygamy throughout, offering it as a superior lifestyle choice, but nowhere does it even mention that polygamy is illegal in America. It openly advocates breaking the law…

Thee (sic) is, however, a current of modern thought seeking to elevate a laudable personal virtue, that of tolerance, over the greater principle of justice. Is it just to tolerate polygamy in the name of religious freedom? The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in 1878, Reynolds v. United States, it is not. Is it just to tolerate the unequal right to inheritance for women? Is it just to tolerate forced marriage? Is it just to tolerate antisemitism? Is it just to tolerate the preaching of hatred toward non-Muslims? Is it just to tolerate the teaching that Muslims are superior to non-Muslims and that men are superior to women? Is it just to tolerate a parallel legal system based on inequality? There are things that our society cannot tolerate and expect to survive. Justice must take its rightful place above tolerance.

END

_________________________

Islam is Political

John R. Houk

© June 9, 2013

________________________

Rebecca Bynum says Islam is not a religion but a hybrid

 

Tea Party Nation social homepage

Victory! Ban lifted on Jesus prayers in Washington


Gordon James Klingenschmitt 3 - Pray in Jesus' Name

I am on the email list of Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt who jumped into the public eye a few years ago for refusing to bend to a military directive that forbad Chaplains from praying in Jesus’ Name. Chaplain Klingenschmitt was forced out of the Navy for praying in Jesus’ Name.

 

Below is the Pray in Jesus’ Name Project email I received today which proclaims a victory and explains the battle to enable public situations under local, State and Federal auspices to pray in Jesus’ Name.

 

JRH 4/17/13

Please Support NCCR

************************************

Victory! Ban lifted on Jesus prayers in Washington. 12th time YOU changed law.

 

By Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt

Sent: 4/17/2013 8:31 AM

 

New Petition to defend military chaplains right to pray “in Jesus’ name,” co-sponsor HR 343.  Sign our urgent petition to defend free speech for chaplains, and we will fax all 535 Congressmen and Senators (saving you time!)  Or select our free option here.

Victory!  Ban lifted on Jesus prayers in Washington State. 12th time YOU changed law.

I have an amazing victory to report.  YOUR PETITIONS have been heard and YOU helped restore freedom to pray “in Jesus’ name,” changing law or policy in our 12th state, when the formerly anti-Jesus Mayor of Longview Washington repented, and joined a slim 4-3 majority vote to lift his own ban that forbid pastors from praying “in Jesus’ name” before city council meetings.

Last month we had reported the mayor of Longview, Washington had banned prayers “in Jesus’ name” before city council meetings, because an atheist complainer threatened to sue, reported Seattle Times.

So we took action. Our activist email readers, maybe even YOU called the anti-Jesus mayor, Don Jensen to demand the word “Jesus” should not be banned as illegal speech if uttered during a prayer by any visiting pastor, during the invocation before city meetings.

 

Please watch the first 7 minutes of Dr. Chaps’ newest TV show, explaining this victory in Longview, WA:

 

VIDEO: The Pray In Jesus Name Show – Episode 0039 – Chaplain Klingenschmitt

 

The Mayor Don Jensen not only voted the right way, he sent one of our friends an email message (shown in the video) explaining why he restored freedom to pray “in Jesus’ name.”  (Let’s call Mayor Jensen to say “thank you” (phone 360-442-5004).

The city council vote on 28 March followed my private email to the Mayor’s attorney James McNamara, who received my notification on 27 March that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled unanimously that the First Amendment PROTECTS citizens and governments’ right to allow Jesus prayers before government meetings, so long as other faith groups are also invited to give an invocation, letting each pray publicly according to the dictates of conscience.

Since 2006, your donations to our activism have helped change law in 12 states, reversing anti-Jesus prayer bans in Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, California, Hawaii and now Washington State.  (All this after the U.S. Congress restored freedom for chaplains after I was wrongly punished for praying “in Jesus’ name in uniform as a Navy Chaplain in 2006).  

Unfortunately, “Jesus prayers” are still facing uphill battles in New York, Virginia, and with military chaplains again, as my friend Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) just introduced a new bill protecting free speech.  Would you sign our latest petition?  And email this to your friends.  Let’s take another stand for Jesus Christ and for free speech today. 

Select here to sign new petition, defend military chaplains right to pray “in Jesus’ name” and co-sponsor HR 343.  We will fax all 535 Congressmen, Senators (saving you time!)

Or select our free option here.

Anti-Jesus Judge bans “Jesus prayers” in Virginia.  Take action.

If you care about freedom to pray “in Jesus’ name,” please phone or email all 7 members of the Pittsylvania Virginia County board of supervisors.  Their names, emails, and phone numbers are listed here.  Say these words:  “Please appeal the bad court decision of the anti-Jesus judge who banned free speech. Defend peoples’ right to pray in Jesus’ name.”

Here’s why:  An anti-Jesus judge has just banned freedom of speech, and told county supervisors they cannot allow anyone to pray “in Jesus’ name” when giving the invocation or benediction at public meetings, reports the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Watch Dr. Chaps’ TV commentary on this anti-Jesus ban in Pittsylvania VA, starting at the 16:06 mark.

 

http://youtu.be/66DvDME8LnM?t=16m6s

“A federal judge Tuesday permanently barred the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors from offering sectarian Christian prayers during its meetings.  U.S. District Judge Michael Urbanski issued the ruling Tuesday, giving a victory to Pittsylvania County resident Barbara Hudson and the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, who represented Hudson. Hudson filed the lawsuit in September 2011.

“The case law in this jurisdiction is crystal clear,” ACLU Legal Director Rebecca Glenberg said Wednesday. “Governments may not have sectarian prayers at their meetings.”  [Dr. Chaps' comment...sectarian means speaking the illegal word "Jesus."]

“I expect to speak to the board to decide what the next move will be,” he said.  Board Chairman Marshall Ecker said of the decision, “If it was up to me, I would contest it.”  The ruling infringes on individual rights and Jesus’ name is being taken out of everything, Ecker said.  Hudson contended that the sectarian prayers violated the First Amendment, amounting to government advancement of religion.”

[Dr. Chaps' comment: The board is considering appeal. Please call or email 7 today here, to request they appeal. Then sign our petition to defend military chaplains freedom to pray in Jesus' name, below.]

Select here to sign new petition, defend military chaplains right to pray “in Jesus’ name” and co-sponsor HR 343.  We will fax all 535 Congressmen, Senators (saving you time!)

Or select our free option here.

ACLU sues North Carolina county to ban Jesus prayers.  Take action.

The ACLU has reportedly sued Rowan County North Carolina to stop legislators from praying or allowing pastors to pray “in Jesus’ name” before council meetings.  But thank God, the supervisors voted 5-0 to defend the lawsuit, and stood with 82% of polled voters who want to defend free speech.  One pastor, Bill Godair, even raised $10,000 to buy ads on 40 billboards around the city, encouraging citizens to stand up for Jesus.

Sadly, the anti-Jesus activists are threatening around the country.  Another county in Georgia recently stopped allowing the Lord’s prayer to be optionally spoken before meetings, and Pueblo Colorado recently banned prayers “in Jesus’ name.”  But Colorado Springs (my home town) still allows a variety of freedom to pray before city meetings.

We’ve been fighting this for 5 years, and your petitions have helped me win legal or legislative battles in 11 states, to defend or restore the right to pray in Jesus’ name.  My own personal lawsuit is now in it’s final stages, to recover my pension and career as a former Navy Chaplain. 

Watch Dr. Chaps’ TV commentary on each of these cases in NC, GA, and CO, where anti-Jesus prayer bans are in effect.

In 2006 I was vindicated by Congress who rescinded the Navy’s “non-sectarian” prayer policy, but since that victory was not grandfathered back to my case, my stand for Jesus cost my 16 year career.

Thank God, THIS YEAR my friend Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) introduced a new bill HR 343 that could forever protect all chaplains’ right to pray “in Jesus’ name” when giving any invocation outside of Sunday chapel.

Jones’ bill would amend Title 10 to read “If called upon to lead a prayer outside of a religious service, a chaplain shall have the prerogative to close the prayer according to the dictates of the chaplain’s own conscience.”  Let’s take a stand for military chaplains’ right to pray “in Jesus’ name.”  Please sign our new petition to pass this bill…

Select here to sign new petition, defend military chaplains right to pray “in Jesus’ name” and co-sponsor HR 343.  We will fax all 535 Congressmen, Senators (saving you time!)

Or select our free option here.

The Bible commands us:  “Whatever you do in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus.” –Colossians 3:17.  Please forward this email widely to your friends, and share on social media here.

 

God Bless you, in Jesus’ name,

 

Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt, PhD

 

P.S.  Prefer to donate by postal mail?  Please write:  The Pray In Jesus Name Project, PO Box 77077, Colorado Springs, CO  80970

________________________

Support the Pray in Jesus’ Name Project by Donating

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 82 other followers

%d bloggers like this: