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

Skip to comments.

Latest Supreme Courtís Religious-Freedom Message: There Are No Second-Class Citizens
National Review ^ | 06/26/2017 | David French

Posted on 06/26/2017 1:10:04 PM PDT by SeekAndFind



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; US: Missouri
KEYWORDS: childsafety; church; churchandstate; comer; discrimination; dnr; freedomofreligion; ginsberg; lutherans; lutheranschools; mdnr; modnr; playground; recycledtires; religiousfreedom; religiousliberty; rubber; ruthbaderginsburg; scotus; sotomayor; supremecourt; trinitylutheran; wallofseparation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

1 posted on 06/26/2017 1:10:05 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified, solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution all the same, and cannot stand.

Amen, Mr. Chief Justice!

2 posted on 06/26/2017 1:18:06 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Justice Sotomayor wrote a sharply worded dissent (Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined) claiming that the Court’s decision “profoundly changes” the relationship between church and state “by holding, for the first time, that the Constitution requires the government to provide public funds directly to a church.” But this is overwrought. Again, given existing precedent, the “profound change” would have been a ruling against the church. The Court would have sanctioned outright anti-religious discrimination in areas as benign as tire-recycling and playground-resurfacing. That would have pushed Establishment Clause jurisprudence back from its trending neutrality to the outright anti-religious hostility of the most far-left judicial activists.

The "wise Latina" talks out her @ss - and RBG proclaims it a bouquet.

3 posted on 06/26/2017 1:20:44 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NobleFree

Does she not think federal funds are going DIRECTLY to churches who supply immigration “services”?


4 posted on 06/26/2017 1:23:50 PM PDT by RebelTXRose (Our Lady of Fatima, Pray for us! PRAY THE ROSARY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ginsburg is a repulsive anti-Christian, Jewish bigot, as her dissent once again proves.


5 posted on 06/26/2017 1:26:09 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RebelTXRose
"Does she not think federal funds are going DIRECTLY to churches who supply immigration “services”?"

Excellent point.
6 posted on 06/26/2017 1:28:33 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NobleFree

Amazing how truly ignorant this woman is. Truly amazing. Most of us on this forum know that there is no such thing as a separation of church and state. We need more church, more imput into our public conscience.


7 posted on 06/26/2017 1:29:03 PM PDT by nikos1121 (Rudy Guiuliani for Head of FBI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RebelTXRose
Does she not think

No, she does not.

8 posted on 06/26/2017 1:36:20 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ginsburg is 84 and can’t hold on much longer. If Trump appoints another Justice with the conservative mettle of Goresuch to replace her the, “Wise Latina” will be irrelevant. Ditto for Justice Kennedy.


9 posted on 06/26/2017 1:39:41 PM PDT by The Great RJ ("Socialists are happy until they run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcherhttp://www.stone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; All

Noting that the misguided pope seems to have missed his calling with respect to devoting much of his papal time to politically correct global warming, seemingly unconcerned about Jesus’ “Great Commission” of Matthew 28:16-20, please consider the following.

Noting that the pope has media enemies like Trump does, on behalf of the pope I question what the pope actually said in Ecuador.


10 posted on 06/26/2017 1:41:29 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RebelTXRose

‘Does she not think federal funds are going DIRECTLY to churches who supply immigration “services”?’

They most certainly are: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865580074/US-governments-faith-based-initiative-moves-ahead-while-dodging-controversy.html


11 posted on 06/26/2017 1:44:58 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The Colorado cake case will likely, sadly, be decided by Kennedy in favor of fascist homosexual commerce.

There are workarounds, and these workarounds will anger and frustrate homosexuals who seek to make Christians bow before perversion.

From the homosexual’s point of view, it is about the normalization of their lifestyle. From the Christian’s point of view, it is about leading a Godly life to the best of their ability.

The workarounds I envisage will be impenetrable unless the United States declares all commerce of any form to be subject to perversion, in effect rendering religious liberty dead.

Bear in mind that not all perverts are comprised of homosexuals and pedophiles. There exist heterosexual perverts. No one is forcing these perverted lifestyles to be outlawed except in the case of pedophilia but that too in time will be incremental in its adapation.

Christians only seek to freely assemble and associate. And by Christians, it is not meant perverts that call themselves Christian but rather those souls that continually seek to better themselves and serve their fellows before God.

The 1964 Civil Rights Act does NOT include homosexuality or any other sexual orientation in its language. But that did not stop Kennedy in his decades of decisions from demolishing what he could of traditional Christian values in the public square.

Perverts will not stop until they are fully accepted as sinless human beings at the altar of the Lord, inside the refuge of churches, requiring by legal force of non-ecclesiastical law that all Christians shall acknowledge and accept their ‘love’, meaning their view of how things are to be defined, in other words, one must abandon common sense and accept their perversion, their order, or else.

So the line must be drawn at the entrance of the Church. That line must not yield. If it does, the group affected is no longer a Church but a group in the grasp of evil. What goes on ‘outside’ the entrance lies in darkness. What goes on inside is and must always be in the light.

My view is that perverts are free to enter the Church as sinners and to seek to amend their way of life, as for any other member. But it is non-negotiable to force Christians to turn away from God and accept the edict of a human court of law, especially ‘inside the Church’.

The workarounds I envisage but will not detail at this time, pertain to defining what is ‘inside the Church’.


12 posted on 06/26/2017 1:53:31 PM PDT by Hostage (Article V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nikos1121
The best argument against this "wall of separation" progressive revisionist history is to point out that the best way to figure out what the "establishment clause" intends is to simply look at how the Framers, who wrote it, behaved immediately afterward. And to do so blows away all of this insanity about public funding and churches.

First, of course, is the famous quote by John Adams, "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." This one quote alone clearly explains the foundational religious principle undergirding the Constitution, which is that a constitution which gives its people unprecedented freedom will only result in anarchy, unless those people are self-restrained by an external moral code (i.e., one given by God and therefore not subject to their own selfish whims). A people (as we have in large part today) that discards this wisdom and instead simply wants to justify their basest urges will eventually find that the "utopia" they have created has become so corrupt and violent that only an authoritarian dictatorship can restore order.

Second, the authors of the "establishment clause" and their contemporaries seemed to have no problem with holding Christian church services in the Senate chambers, and even the chambers of the Supreme Court! As President, Thomas Jefferson (you know, that guy the left portrays as a "deist") had a reserved seat and was said to rarely miss a service. Well, if the Constitution permits holding church services in the capitol itself, then CLEARLY it permits religious institutions to receive "public" funds.

Third, the early Congress appropriated federal funds to purchase bibles and hire preachers to evangelize the Indian tribes. And the Massachusetts state constitution, upon which the federal constitution is largely based, STILL contains a provision for the use of state funds to hire preachers, because of the necessity of religious instruction to exercising good citizenship (I'm paraphrasing that last part, don't have it in front of me at the moment).

So obviously, this relatively recent revisionism is a complete and utter lie, promulgated by progressives because of nothing more than their desire to abolish God from public life (and private life, if they can). All of their political craziness really boils down to nothing more than their rebellion against God. They are trying desperately to create a Man-centered governing regime, in the vain belief that it will "free" them. On the contrary, pursuit of their agenda will only result in bondage, pain, and death.

13 posted on 06/26/2017 2:05:45 PM PDT by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
With this ruling by SCOTUS, in conjunction with the prior oking same sex marriage, all bets are now off. No combination of individuals can be denied anything.

Nor do I see how age laws protecting minors can now stand.

This country has long crossed a slippery slope. We're on downhill skis now.

14 posted on 06/26/2017 2:05:58 PM PDT by ealgeone (int)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ealgeone
With this ruling by SCOTUS, in conjunction with the prior oking same sex marriage, all bets are now off. No combination of individuals can be denied anything.

Nor do I see how age laws protecting minors can now stand.

Did you read the article or just the headline? If the former, how do you conclude from churches' right to participate in public programs that no combination of individuals can be denied anything or that age laws protecting minors cannot stand?

15 posted on 06/26/2017 2:18:23 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: All

‘Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer”

Who was Comer? I have wondered what kind evil bastard tried to stop a church from being eligible to bid on safety materials to put on a children’s playground?


16 posted on 06/26/2017 2:37:28 PM PDT by gibsonguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: gibsonguy
Who was Comer?

Director, Missouri Department Of Natural Resources.

17 posted on 06/26/2017 2:44:04 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NobleFree

The words separation between church & state comes from Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptist in 1/1/1802. Assuring the Baptist that the government would not interfere with religion. The complete letter was used till 1947.

In 1947 Everson v Board of Education a liberal court took the words separation between church & state out of the letter and used just those words out of context. This is where the so-called separation of church & state comes from. This his been uses ever since to remove religion from everything. The court need to put those words back in the letter and look at the complete meaning


18 posted on 06/26/2017 2:44:42 PM PDT by klsparrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Sotamayor and Ginsberg need to go.


19 posted on 06/26/2017 3:01:35 PM PDT by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51; Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: noiseman
The best argument against this "wall of separation" progressive revisionist history is to point out ...

... the "free exercise" clause of the First Amendment. In effect, it says that just as Congress shall make no law ESTABLISHING a state religion, neither shall it prohibit a religion from being practiced.

"Being practiced" doesn't mean going to a steepled building on Sunday and singing hymns. At least to Christians, it means living a Gospel, a life in accord with the Holy Spirit, and at peace with God's holy word. Forcing a tradesman to support the abomination of homosexuality is to deny him the right to practice his religion. And all so a couple of fags can have a cake at their perverted ritual, a cake they can get a hundred other places.

This ruling must be struck down on the basis that it defies the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment.

20 posted on 06/26/2017 3:04:40 PM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

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