Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The President's Religion - Should he force his personal beliefs on other Americans?
Web site - ^ | 10/01/2010 | Sarge

Posted on 10/22/2012 8:14:34 AM PDT by David-Stansberry



Historically Americans have expressed legitimate concerns that a President might use his office to promote his personal religious beliefs. From President John Kennedy in 1960, a Catholic, to 2008 Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, a Mormon, candidates and presidents have been required to express a commitment not to use the office of the President and Commander-In-Chief to promote their personal moral beliefs. If President John Kennedy had tried to label anyone who rejected his personal religious beliefs as “bigots” and guilty of “discrimination” Americans would have instantly recognized the problem. Fortunately, President Kennedy made it clear he would not use his position as President to promote his personal religious beliefs. If Gov. Mitt Romney had been elected President and started promoting polygamy (a different definition for marriage), which a few Mormon groups still believe in, there would have been no doubt about what would be occurring. If he labeled the prohibition in US law against polygamy as “discrimination” and those who opposed his views as “polyga-phobic”, Americans would have rebelled, and rightly so. Gov. Romney made it clear he does not believe in polygamy and that he would not let his personal beliefs overrule the Constitutional limitations of the Presidency.


President Obama, in his State of the Union Message, announced that as Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces he intended to make “OPEN homosexuality” the “rule of law” in the United States Military. President Obama has the right to believe what he chooses, worship where he pleases, and speak publicly of his beliefs but there is a Constitutional limit on his authority.

President Obama, like all other government officials, is prohibited by the Constitution from using his official position, as President to force his personal moral views upon other Americans. Using his authority as Commander-In-Chief of the military to force his moral belief regarding homosexuality upon service members by force of law (UCMJ) is likewise prohibited.

The President has made his moral beliefs relating to the subject of homosexuality clear: • He believes that homosexuality is moral • He believes that homosexuality is normal • He believes that most of the problems encountered by homosexuals are not due to their lifestyle but to the rejection of them and their lifestyle by most Americans • He opposes the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman, and has promised his homosexual supporters he will work to repeal it • He believes that homosexuals are “born that way” and it is not a lifestyle choice • He believes that service in the military is a “civil right” and is willing to ignore damage to our military readiness and national security in order to force open homosexuality on all military branches • He believes that to oppose his beliefs and his moral conclusions about homosexuality is “discrimination” and “bigotry”

Interestingly enough, that is exactly the doctrine of one particular church. The Metropolitan Community Church ( was established by a homosexual for homosexuals to promote the homosexual moral standard.

“What really set the MCC apart from all the other Christian churches was its Doctrine. It taught that homosexuality was moral, not sinful, and that the Bible supported those beliefs. They believed that homosexual marriage was ordained by God just as heterosexual marriages.” (

The doctrine of MCC agrees 100% with President Obama’s moral beliefs regarding homosexuality. Or perhaps, in reference to the new law just signed by President Obama, he believes, practices, and promotes the moral standard of the Metropolitan Community Church 100%.

The President can belief what he likes, practice what he believes and share his “faith” and ideas, but he cannot use his office to force others to accept his personal moral beliefs. He can attend the church of his choice but cannot constitutionally use the office of the President to promote the doctrine of the Metropolitan Community Church.

THE PRESIDENT’S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS ARE REFLECTED IN HIS US SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENTS • Judge Sonia Sotomayor joined a Second Circuit order that denied a minister the right to put a Bible verse on a public sign because the verse was Leviticus 18:22 which refers to homosexuality as sinful. • Justice Elena Kragen - We know very little about Elena Kragen except that as Dean of Harvard Law School she removed Military Recruiters from the Office of Career Services because she opposed the military’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy. The U. S. Supreme Court upheld the law which guaranteed equal access for military recruiters in an 8-0 ruling and revealed then “Dean Kragen’s willingness to disregard Federal law if it did not support her personal belief.

The nomination of these two Supreme Court justices was so important to the homosexual agenda that the Human Rights Campaign (a more accurate name would be Homosexual Rights Campaign – HRC) made the vote for or against the nomination of these two Supreme Court judges one of their “scored” items for promoting the homosexual agenda.

If this is the “litmus test” for President Obama’s Supreme Court nominees we can expect the same for all his judicial appointees.


HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE Millions of voters in one of the most liberal states in the U.S. (California) voted to ban same-sex marriages and passed “Proposition 8”. This act was consistent with the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which had been passed by the US Congress. A homosexual couple from San Francisco had filed another lawsuit to force the MCC doctrine of same sex marriage on America through the Justice system. (The first lawsuit seeking legal recognition of same-sex “marriages” had been filed in 1979 by Rev. Troy Perry, the minister who started the Metropolitan Community Church.) Predictably, the case ends up before an openly homosexual judge and he rules against not only Federal law passed by the U.S. Congress (DOMA) but also voids the democratic process and disenfranchises millions of California voters. On Wednesday, August 4, 2010, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, ruled California Proposition 8 unconstitutional.

DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL On October 12, 2010, U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips issued a worldwide injunction stopping enforcement of the Clinton era "don't ask, don't tell" policy. After numerous lawsuits covering a span of 17 years an activist judge deems that she is the “worldwide” military commander. Without any consideration of the US military mission of safeguarding America she decides that the doctrine of the Metropolitan Community Church should be forced on all service members, regardless of their religious beliefs.

THE PRESIDENTS’S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS ARE REFLECTED IN HIS AGENDA FOR CONGRESS With US economy in shambles and in the middle of two ongoing armed conflicts - forcing MCC doctrine upon all military personnel was one of his highest priorities. When President Obama made his announcement to end “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” and replace it with Open Homosexuality in the military in his February 2010 State of the Union speech there was a pretense that “an assessment to determine the impact on the military” would be done. The military was given until December 1, 2010 to conduct a study and report the results but the study was not to determine if OPEN homosexuality should be forced on the military, or if it would be good or bad for military readiness. This study simply instructed the military leadership to find the best method to force implement the President’s views regarding homosexuality on all military personnel.

A letter sent on April 30 to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (who has aligned himself with the President in replacing DADT policy with OPEN homosexuality into the military) stated, “I strongly oppose any legislation that seeks to change this policy prior to the completion of this vital assessment process.”

In May 2010, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), U.S. Speaker of the House, who coincidentally represents about 80% of San Francisco, decided they couldn’t wait for the “study” to be completed. Congress would vote before the mid-term elections in November 2010 just in case the Democrat majority lost power and might not be able to push it through afterwards. This vote revealed that the real concern was not about military readiness or national security but paying back a very influential, wealthy, group of supporters. This was another “vote before you read it” and “slam it through while we can” effort. Unfortunately it was also a slap in the face of America’s military service members.

Speaker Pelosi attached the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to the Military Appropriations Bill to force passage of the measure. In a time when we have American military personnel fighting in two wars she reveals that it is more important to pass her social agenda and force open homosexuality on the military than it is to give the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines the things they need to fight these wars.

I realize that the city of San Francisco represents most of Speaker Pelosi’s district. Her moral beliefs and the beliefs of many of her constituents might agree with the views of the Metropolitan Community Church and President Obama, but she is also forbidden by the Constitution from forcing her personal moral standard on other Americans via the power of law. Those Americans who are putting their lives on the line for our freedom should most certainly be protected from this abuse of power.

It is ironic that so much freedom was given to a city like San Francisco to “live as they like” and now through the courts, Congress, and even the office of the Presidency, the homosexuality moral standard for which they are world famous, is being forced on all Americans. The doctrine of MCC which dominates in the city of San Francisco is now the dominate religious belief in the US Military.

The bill was passed by the House of Representatives but thankfully enough members in the Senate refused to be bullied and have this forced upon America in this manner. Congress went home to the mid-term elections without approving the Military Appropriations bill.

President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have indicated that forcing OPEN homosexuality on the US military is one of their highest priorities for the lame-duck Congress. With service members fighting two ongoing wars, our economy in shambles, jobless rates continuing at almost 10%, such a high priority for this issue should raise a red flag to all Americans. Why does promoting the DOCTRINE OF THE METROPOLITAN COMMUNITY CHURCH have such a high priority for our national leaders?

Promotion of the President’s personal moral beliefs and MCC doctrine continued to be one of his highest national priorities, even during the lame-duck session of Congress, During the lame-duck session of Congress, in December 2010, both the House and Senate have voted to repeal DADT. Unfortunately, instead of reaffirming the original ban, they have made the beliefs of the Metropolitan Community Church the dominate religious belief in the US military (e.g. OPEN homosexuality in the military with UCMJ prosecution for any who disagrees or opposes the MCC beliefs). With the votes of 63 House of Representative members who had already lost their seats in the 2010 election - DADT was repealed and the doctrinal position of MCC was instituted as the rule of law in the US Military Services.

Americans are a tolerant people but one thing we should not tolerate is allowing those to whom we granted much freedom, to take away our freedoms. All Americans should have the right of freedom of speech and religion. NO GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL should be allowed to pass laws making other Americans accept their personal moral standard or the doctrine of one particular church.

Do we really want to develop a military which “follows orders even when they know those orders are morally wrong”? Isn’t that the excuse for most of the world’s human rights abuses by military personnel? “Just following orders” without regard to the morality of the situation is currently unacceptable in the US military. The Commander-In-Chief’s forcing of OPEN homosexuality upon the military will change that.

If OPEN homosexuality is forced upon our military, a service member serving in the US Military who disagrees with the MCC doctrine that “homosexuality is moral and normal” will face UCMJ (military law) action. Veteran Generals who have led our military in the War on Terrorism, who questioned the wisdom of forcing OPEN homosexuality into the military, were told to be silent or leave the military.

Instead of dismissing homosexuals for a lifestyle choice they make which is incompatible with military service, we will be dismissing moral Americans who have served their country in the military because they refuse to compromise what they know to be morally wrong. “Discrimination, hate speech, and hate crime” charges will replace DADT dismissals. Unlike homosexual service members dismissed under DADT, these brave Americans will not receive “honorable discharges”.

TRADING 15,000 HOMOSEXUALS FOR 200,000+ SERVICE MEMBERS Estimates indicate that approximately 15,000 military personnel have been dismissed in the last 17 years (since 1993) under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. Many of those have “self-reported” their homosexual status after taking the training the military provides, to get out of fulfilling their contractual obligation. Every year many more personnel have been discharged for violation of the army’s “weight program” and even for “pregnancy” than for homosexuality. Military service is not a “right” and homosexuality is one of the lifestyle choices which is incompatible with military service.

Surveys indicate that at least 10% of current service members would not have joined if “OPEN homosexuality” were in place. Since we currently have over 2,000,000 members in the military that means we could lose or fail to enlist over 200,000 personnel. These people are not “bigots” or “discriminators” they are those service members of good, strong moral standing who could not conscientiously remain silent while the US government uses the US military to promote the immoral standard of the Metropolitan Community church. The number of service members who say that OPEN homosexuality is immoral and would intrude on their freedom of speech and religious beliefs is 25% or more. That means the total number of service members who might leave to be able to keep their right of freedom of religion over 500,000.

Does you think losing 200,000 to 500,000 of the best military personnel we have serving today indicates a negative impact on good order and disciple or military morale? Do you think it will have a negative effect on the military’s mission of providing national security for the United States?

THE PRESIDENT’S REAL OBJECTIVE IN REPEALING DADT IS FORCING SAME-SEX MARRIAGE ON AMERICA It should be noted that homosexuals were permitted to serve in the military under DADT. They were just not allowed to practice the lifestyle. You can also be dismissed from the military for many reasons including adultery, prostitution, and over-eating (being overweight). You can believe and practice these things outside the military but as with homosexuality, still serve inside the service if you don’t practice them there.

This proves that repeal of DADT was not actually done to allow homosexuals to serve in the military; they could do that under DADT. It is intended to advance the social agenda and religious doctrine of the Metropolitan Community Church. As soon as the DADT repeal and OPEN homosexuality in the military is finalized, you can expect lawsuits be filed to force DOD to recognize homosexual marriages. Although the new law states it will not conflict with the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) there is nothing to prevent the continuing onslaught of homosexual lawsuits against the DOD to force Federal recognition of same-sex marriages in the military services. Forcing the doctrine of the Metropolitan Community Church on America has failed through using the judicial branch of the government and at most ballot boxes. With the help of the Commander-In-Chief they are now using the military to attain that goal.

NOW THAT OPEN HOMOSEXUALITY HAS BEEN FORCED INTO THE MILITARY THE PRESIDENT AND VP VIEWS ON HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE HAVE “BEGAN EVOLVING” President Obama, on the very day he signed legislation forcing OPEN homosexuality on the military the President stated he was “struggling” with his position on homosexual marriage and as it evolves, he might be willing to support it in the near future.

The truth is President Obama actually supported homosexual marriage in 1996 when he ran for the state senate in Illinois. His statement at that time was, “I favor legalizing same-sex marriage and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages”. Despite all the double-talk on this issue which we have heard from President Obama as he has moved into the national political arena, his position is evident. He is in favor of the Metropolitan Community Church belief regarding homosexual marriage and will support it as soon as it is politically viable. As many other politicians, his actions speak much louder than his words.

On Dec. 24, 2010’s “Good Morning America” interview, Vice President Joe Biden predicted that homosexual marriage will be soon be the law of the land in America. He bases his prediction on the fact that the same forces which put OPEN homosexuality in the military will repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and make homosexual marriage equal to heterosexual marriage. Interestingly enough, he said his position on “gay marriage” was evolving, just like the President’s beliefs. Could this be a new theory of evolution?

In response to a question at a press interview President Obama responded, “I think the country’s evolving. And I think there is inevitability for a national consensus on gay marriage. That is my view. …I think it is evolving…the next effort is probably going to be to deal with the so called DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act which defines marriage as being between members of the opposite sex).

The President fails to note that there is already a “consensus” on homosexual marriage. Americans have rejected it. He means the “consensus” will be changed to what he believes. He intends to support the doctrinal views of the Metropolitan Community Church by repealing DOMA and implies that he will lead that religious “conversion” of America.

In summary, the President, our Commander-In-Chief, certainly has the right to whatever personal moral standard he chooses, even the moral beliefs of the Metropolitan Community Church. However, he does not have the right to use his position as President or Commander-In-Chief to force his personal beliefs on any other American, even those in the United States Military, who have put their lives on the line in defense of freedom and the American way of life. The first lawsuit ever filed to try to gain recognition of homosexual marriage was filed by Rev. Troy Perry, the founder of the Metropolitan Community Church and had another homosexual marriage lawsuit in the court system when DADT was repealed by President Obama).

The current effort by President Obama to force all military personnel to accept the homosexual moral standard of the Metropolitan Community Church is unconstitutional and should be opposed. The President’s statements indicating that he intends to continue to promote the doctrine of the MCC of same-sex marriage by repealing DOMA should be recognized for what it is, an UNCONSTITUTIONAL use of his office to promote his personal religious beliefs.

If you agree with the position presented here, please share this article with your friends, family, and anyone who is concerned about freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and a strong military which is best prepared to accomplish their primary mission of national defense.

PB-UP.COM The Sarge

TOPICS: Moral Issues; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: dadt; doma; homosexualagenda; husseinobama; mcc; obamasreligion; pimpmyblog; protectmarriage; unconstitional

1 posted on 10/22/2012 8:14:37 AM PDT by David-Stansberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: David-Stansberry

Obama has shoved his islamic beliefs on us...

2 posted on 10/22/2012 8:17:47 AM PDT by JohnD9207 (Mitt is not a conservative but he is not the Monster Obama and the 4th estate claimed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnD9207

??? In what way has this happened?

3 posted on 10/22/2012 8:21:57 AM PDT by stuartcr ("When silence speaks, it speaks only to those that have already decided what they want to hear.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: David-Stansberry

I thought this stupid question was addressed when JFK ran for office?

4 posted on 10/22/2012 8:28:48 AM PDT by mass55th (Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway...John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnD9207

NO! he hasn’t. All his key appointees for our security and military are muslim, complete with policies set with the advice of CAIR, the MB and ACLU.... all for our safety and security.

He is a kind, caring and just pResident.

...more likely a alien resident.

I still can not believe in the confederacy of fools who made him the fool prince!

5 posted on 10/22/2012 9:15:44 AM PDT by himno hero (hadnuff)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mass55th
JFK liked girls and had Protestant friends. Obama doesn't particularly like girls and all his friends are either Moslems or their lackeys.

What question was it you were pointing to?

6 posted on 10/22/2012 9:21:05 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: David-Stansberry
This article is hauntingly familiar to the argument “we must have separation of church and state”. We must elevate the discussion to a deeper reality. My morals say murder, and theft are wrong. Thank God my morals are enforced on others. Remember the preamble? The reason the United States of America was formed was to “form a more perfect union, establish justice...”. The only was to have that is for someone’s morals to be made into law. As a civilization begins to decay it begins to reject natural law or God's law which has been widely recognized and unchanging through time.

We must not argue against applying morals in government. On the contrary, we argue for applying the ONLY unchanging moral standard, the laws of the unchanging God.

7 posted on 10/22/2012 10:18:22 AM PDT by EyeSalveRich (please legislate morals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: David-Stansberry

From the moment the Comrade took office he set out trying to mainstream Islam. If anybody thinks it will be any different under the Temple Bishop he’s kidding himself. Mainstream Mormonism full speed ahead. When it happens, we will have all these gullible Christians who were behind him in the Repub primaries to thank.

If you don’t think the Mormons will make hay out of having Mormonism as everybody’s president, then you haven’t had much dealing with Mormonism. I’m talking about the mainstreaming of Joseph Smith and his golden plates. Mormonism is a full blown cult and they will do what cults do when they gain the advantage.

8 posted on 10/22/2012 12:25:51 PM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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
Topics · Post Article

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