I would ask you what on earth you are talking about, but I’m sure you don’t know either.
But just to clarify ....
The Church warns of encroaching government, yet the opposite is more true, the church encroaches on government. This is far better historical fact than what you tried to present as historical fact — which was neither historical nor fact.
The government wants to allow gay marriage, make available contraception and abortions ... so be it. The government crosses the line when it tells church’s they must hire gay priests, perform abortions and provide contraception in their clinics, providing that that institute does not receive an iota of public funding.
So, if the church sticks it’s nose in the public trough, then they are subject to government rules and regulations.
The 1st amendment does not read if a person or religious body receives government monies they are necessarily excluded from exercising their religion without government interference. The mandate also applies broadly to include institutions that do not receive any funding. So your point is moot.
What I presented was fact and it was indeed historical fact. I am not too surprised that you did not recognize this.
Please show where under our Constitutional system of government that the “Church” has encroached into government. Are the clergy another branch of government of which I am unaware? Are there special judicial chambers established by the State to hear complaints dealing solely with matters of faith? Do we have trials for heresy in this country? Is there a faith clamoring to become the official religion of this country? Is Obama going on his knees to show that D.C. is worth the price of a Mass? I thought not.
I am curious what other limits do you want to set on our Constitutional rights based on receiving back our own money paid to the government in the form of taxes and fees? Should freedom of the press be curtailed if a government agency provided a tax incentive to hire local unemployed to work in the printing press? Should we accept being searched without a warrant and without probable cause if we receive Social Security Benefits? Should a preacher not be allowed to preach against gambling if his church receives a portion of local tax dollars to operate a soup kitchen?
Our rights are not doled out by a benevolent government as rewards of fidelity and compliance. They are not a matter of quid pro quo. If people do not understand that they deserve to have tyranny descend on this nation. We are not lackeys and lickspittles. Rights are part of the natural law and the editing of them is an assault on freedom.