Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Feds' War on Religion (Part 1 of 2)
Townhall.com ^ | December 20, 2011 | Chuck Norris

Posted on 12/20/2011 3:28:04 AM PST by Kaslin

Anyone who knows me knows that for my whole life, I've been a huge supporter of our U.S. military personnel, whom I congratulate about their victory in Iraq. But when our president and officials in the U.S. Department of Defense exchange a war abroad for a religious war at home, can't we see that something else is seriously awry in this administration?

It's one thing to watch "merry Christmas" be omitted from signs in your favorite department store but quite another to see Bibles withheld from wounded warriors at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. It's true! On Dec. 2, the Family Research Council reported that it had discovered a memo released in September at the esteemed military hospital, in which Navy officials announced that "no religious items (including Bibles, reading material, and/or artifacts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit."

Thank God for those in the FRC, as well as Rep. Randy Forbes and other members of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, who demanded to meet with officials at Walter Reed and in the Navy about the matter. Just a few days ago, Vice Adm. John Mateczun confessed that the memo had not been properly evaluated and was being rescinded, and Walter Reed posted a public apology on its website.

But imagine if the FRC had not found this memo. Imagine how many others like it aren't found and are circulated around the federal government.

If you think this is an isolated incident, consider the following dozen-plus examples reported in the past six months alone by the FRC and Rep. Forbes' office and a few of my own I found, which document how religious freedom and Christian liberty in particular have been limited, quarantined, omitted or outright obliterated.

--The Air Force Academy apologized for merely announcing Operation Christmas Child --a Christian-based charity and relief program designed to send holiday gifts to impoverished children around the world.

--Yet the Air Force is building an $80,000 Stonehenge-like worship site for "earth-based" religions, including "pagans, Wiccans, druids, witches and followers of Native American faiths."

--The Marine Corps considered tearing down a Camp Pendleton cross meant to honor fallen heroes.

--Air Force officials stripped religious curriculum from a 20-year-old course on "just war theory."

--The Department of Veterans Affairs censored references to God and Jesus during prayers at Houston National Cemetery.

--The Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate passed the $662 billion National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which included a repeal of Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which states: "Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy."

--The Department of Health and Human Services unveiled new health care rules that ignore basic conscience protections for medical workers with faith-based objections to abortion and contraception.

--Officials at HHS denied funding for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' successful program for sex trafficking victims because of the church's teaching on human life.

--Administration officials refused to intervene in the closing of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.

--President Barack Obama has lobbied for the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would trample on the faith of employers in hiring, firing and promotion decisions.

--The Pentagon released new regulations that force chaplains to perform same-sex "weddings" despite their religious objections.

--Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demonized other countries' religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights.

--Just this past week, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation sent a letter to officials at Travis Air Force Base, demanding the removal or transfer of a Nativity scene and a menorah that are part of a larger holiday display on the base.

What is going on in the U.S. military? Why is it so difficult for the feds to understand the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, which says they "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?

And how many of these restrictions of our religious liberties are direct results of President Obama's being in office? And if these occurred in just the past six months, imagine what would happen in another four years if Obama were to be re-elected. Our service members, as well as our devoted military Christian chaplains, deserve better.

Gone are the days when the commander in chief rallied the troops and nation with a religious presidential call as Ronald Reagan and Franklin D. Roosevelt did. FDR declared in his Christmas address to the nation Dec. 24, 1944 (the first Christmas after D-Day): "Here, at home, we will celebrate this Christmas Day in our traditional American way because of its deep spiritual meaning to us; because the teachings of Christ are fundamental in our lives; and because we want our youngest generation to grow up knowing the significance of this tradition and the story of the coming of the immortal Prince of Peace and Good Will. ... We pray that with victory will come a new day of peace on earth, in which all the nations of the earth will join together for all time. That is the spirit of Christmas, the holy day. May that spirit live and grow throughout the world in all the years to come." (Watch Reagan's 1981 Christmas greeting to the nation on YouTube. It's titled Ronald Reagan Christmas address (12/23/81).")

In many respects, we need to turn back the clock in America to our founding principles, values and liberties, and those include the intricate and pivotal role that religion and Christianity played in our early republic. It is time not to flee religious liberties, but to re-embrace them, especially during this sacred Christmas week. I'll do just that in Part 2 when I specifically share with you the beliefs I know can restore our homes and country.

(In continued support of our military, I'm inviting everyone to join my wife, Gena, and me on Jan. 7 for the premiere of the documentary "Answering the Call," about my trips to Iraq to encourage the troops. You can get tickets via http://www.KickStartKids.org. I also encourage participation in care packages for our troops via http://www.Give2TheTroops.org and, as we recently did, via Operation Patriot Care Package to those in Afghanistan, mission excerpts of which will be aired on Sean Hannity's Fox News Channel show Dec. 23 and posted at http://www.PatriotCarePackage.com.)


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: christianity; faithandfamily; freedomofreligion; usmilitary

1 posted on 12/20/2011 3:28:09 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The Feds defend Islam and those who murder Americans
but then profess Islam (becoming heroes of the DOJ).

America is beholden to its attackers, it seems.


2 posted on 12/20/2011 3:37:00 AM PST by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

IMHO...

If we do not nominate Bachmann or Santorum this war on Christianity will basically continue unabated. Perry also appears to be a solid Christian, but I don’t think he would have the effectiveness to not have anti-Christian regulation get past him. GW Bush wound up appeasing the anti-Christians and having things slip past him even though he professed a strong faith.

Bachmann and Santorum in their speaking reveal the best acumen for detecting even subtle attacks and holding firm for Christian principles.

Romney and Gingrich have careers filled with flip flops and Paul and Huntstman do not appear to be of a mind to staunchly protect Christian values.


3 posted on 12/20/2011 3:43:20 AM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

There’s just too much bible-thumping, gun-loving and
Messiah worshipping around here and it has to stop.

/Sarcasm/


4 posted on 12/20/2011 5:31:51 AM PST by ripley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Thanks.

Norris's use of FDR's Christmas Message during WWII should make all Democrats blush with shame at how they, in the past few decades, have caused generations of young Americans to believe that such a Presidential action somehow violates the protections of the U. S. Constitution.

Roosevelt followed in a long line of Presidents and other elected officials in speaking freely, as was his constitutional right, about such deeply-held spiritual belief.

George Washington: "The Hon. Continental Congress having been pleased to allow a Chaplain to each Regiment, with the pay of Thirty-three Dollars and one third pr month -- The Colonels or commanding officers of each regiment are directed to procure Chaplains accordingly; persons of good Characters and exemplary lives -- To see that all inferior officers and soldiers pay them a suitable respect and attend carefully upon religious exercises. The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger -- The General hopes and trusts, that every officer and man, will endeavour so to live, and act, as becomes a Christian Soldier defending the dearest Rights and Liberties of his country." – General Orders, (July 9, 1776) George Washington Papers at the Library of Congress, 1741-1799: Series 3g Varick Transcripts

" The Commander in Chief directs that divine Service be performed every Sunday at 11 oClock in those Brigades to which there are Chaplains; those which have none to attend the places of worship nearest to them. It is expected that Officers of all Ranks will by their attendence set an Example to their men. While we are zealously performing the duties of good Citizens and soldiers we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of Religion. To the distinguished Character of Patriot, it should be our highest Glory to add the more distinguished Character of Christian. The signal Instances of providential Goodness which we have experienced and which have now almost crowned our labours with complete Success, demand from us in a peculiar manner the warmest returns of Gratitude and Piety to the Supreme Author of all Good." – General Orders (May 2, 1778); published in Writings of George Washington (1932), Vol.XI, pp. 342-343

"My ears hear with pleasure the other matters you mention. Congress will be glad to hear them too. You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do every thing they can to assist you in this wise intention; and to tie the knot of friendship and union so fast, that nothing shall ever be able to loose it." – George Washington speech to the Delaware Indian Chiefs (May 12, 1779); published in The Writings of George Washington (1932), Vol.XV, p. 55

Now, the question for today's citizens must be: who likely understood the Constitution and its Bill of Rights better--George Washington, the First President, who was in attendance when it was framed?

Or, is it the mid-to-late 20th Century "progressives" who re-interpreted it and have imposed their coercive will on a mostly constitutionally illiterate citizenry?

5 posted on 12/20/2011 6:12:42 PM PST by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; Jim Robinson

BTTT - this is important.


6 posted on 12/20/2011 6:24:33 PM PST by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/american-family-association-founder-endorses-newt-gingrich-161221663.html

“Newt Gingrich recognizes the threat to our country posed by judges and lawyers imposing values upon the country inconsistent with our religious heritage, and has proposed constitutional steps to bring the courts back in balance under the constitution,” Wildmon said in a statement. “We need someone in the White House who can balance the budget and get the economy moving again. Newt has done it before and I believe he can do it again.”

“Gingrich has assailed the judicial branch on the campaign trail, arguing that judges who make decisions out of step with public opinion should face the possibility of impeachment.”


7 posted on 12/20/2011 6:42:55 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
IMHO,

Newt does speak dramatically about the courts, and his statements are framed to think that it would further the interests of Christians. But in truth, these statements, in my mind, are neither here nor there, as I do not see any evidence that this is one of the top issues for him that he has been publicly advancing for at least a few years. I am concerned that he is simply bringing this up as a hot-button issue that gains attention for him and appeals to Christians who may not think through all the repercussions of what he is saying he wants to do. I do wholeheartedly agree with his evaluation of the courts as being far-left leaning; and I certainly loved his idea of impeaching judges. I would think that likely targets for impeachment are those that create case law precedents that thwart the intent of the Constitution and law. It would be nice to see some big government programs struck down based on unconstitutionality, certainly.

“Gingrich has assailed the judicial branch on the campaign trail, arguing that judges who make decisions out of step with public opinion should face the possibility of impeachment.”

This reveals a blatantly unconstitutional and purely populist message. I should hope that Mr. Gingrich does not propose to force the court system to bend to political pressure from the other branches of government or the public - the person who said this in support of Newt, I hope, is out of step with Newt's proposal.

Constitutionally, and righteously so, the courts are not to operate based on public opinion or pressure from various groups, but on the law. A judge's decision is not a popularity contest. If a majority of people side with something unconstitutional, that does not make it constitutional. If a criminal is prosecuted and found guilty, but is very popular with the public, we don't let him go free. In fact, the only reason why abortion is legal is because of the influence of pro-abortion groups on politicians and judges. We should be moving away from the historical influence of public opinion on court decisions and moving towards the courts actually doing their job right, i.e., rendering impartial verdicts based on the law. If that's what Newt proposes, I'm all for it. This is why, IMHO, it would be a terrible mistake, a Constitutional tragedy, to haul judges before Congress to testify about their decisions. Impeachment is the legitimate recourse, and of course there are many, many judges who should be impeached. Elminating courts is also a legitimate course of action. Even further than that, the whole legal profession is out of control, mostly in legal education. Law schools are not doing their job, judges are not doing their job. They pretend to not understand the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law, and thereby turn courts into a circus. The courts being a circus, where criminals defeat the judicial system by subverting it using it's own rules, actually adds to the frustrations of law enforcement.

This is a war that must be waged on all fronts, continually, not a simple matter of making grandiose campaign gestures. I would think that Bachmann and Santorum would wage that war as well as, if not better than, anyone else in the race.

Again, IMHO, I do laud the basic issue that Newt raises.
8 posted on 12/21/2011 4:45:29 AM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson