If you want a definitive example of why the United States is in such a deplorable state, take a look at the 30 Seconds comments for Monday, January 3, 2011 published in the Times-Reporter. Somebody, who has no idea of what the United States Constitution is all about, made the following statement: ““Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” That is not a quote from a godless liberal, those are the first words of the First Amendment that the founding fathers wrote. It is intended to protect this country from being taken over by any religion, including Christianity.”
The comment is designed to make a point which is hidden, most likely with a political motive in mind. Considering the timing, it opens some questions, none of which will be answered by he who submitted it to the Times-Reporter.
The First Amendment says, “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 of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The statement made by the anonymous 30 Seconds submitter, is privileged by the First Amendment. But it is a half truth, a standard tactic for those who do not use logic to back up their statements. The rest of statement of the Amendment forbids prohibition of the free exercise of religion by the United States Congress.
To this point, the Congress has done neither. It has not tried to establish a national religion nor has it passed legislation to prohibit the free exercise of religion in the United States. United States courts have prohibited the free exercise of religion through bench legislation, the most blatant being the United States Supreme Court who has consistently ruled against the Second Amendment on every occasion the matter of religion has come before it.
The writers of the Constitution were specific in what they said. The terminology is concise and understandable. Congress shall make no law establishing nor prohibiting the practice of religion in the United States. It’s that simple. Federal courts rule on matters of the Constitution, the Supreme Court particularly, and in the case of the First Amendment, should rule only on the action which Congress takes, not on arguments which occur within the sovereign states. It’s called home rule and such matters belong under the jurisdiction of such states, not legislative federal courts..
Those who fear and attack Christianity, but apparently no other religion including Islam, are hard to fathom. The United States was founded by Christian believers who brought their beliefs and work ethics to a new world. They built it into the most powerful and productive country in the history of the world. It was not until the sixties when the Christian ethic began to be debased that the United States started into decline. There is no question, regardless of religious orientation, that the loss of the Judeo-Christian ethic which built this country, has produced disastrous social and economic results. Crime runs rampant in government. Lack of responsibility in the family has created a new class of poor, enslaved to the government, totally dependent on welfare payments, trapped in a life without hope.
The caller of the Times-Reporter article has an ax to grind which he does not explain. Not knowing what that ax is, opens inquiry into its interpretation. With the political situation being what it is, could this be a continuation of the debate as to whether a mosque should be built in downtown New York City to commemorate the successful murders of four thousand by Muslim terrorists? Perhaps he is the typical atheist who believes that Christ never existed, was not resurrected, and is a meaningless legend, but is so afraid that he is wrong in his belief that he fears even the mention of Jesus’ name? Or could it be possible that he really doesn’t understand what Christianity has done for this nation?
What other country has freely in the past done so much for so many people in so many countries? No country has provided the relief to stricken peoples without asking for something in return as we have. After the Second World War, we rebuilt the economies of our enemies. We have responded to disasters with aid and succor as no other nation has ever done. We have gone in harm’s way to protect those who could not protect themselves. We have liberated more people from oppression and helped them reconstruct their lives than any country which ever existed. And we did it because of a history of responsibility, honor, and hard work, all based on the Christian ethic.
If the caller believed the Constitution, and the First Amendment, was important, if he understood what they meant, he would not be complaining about Christianity, which he really is. Rather, he would be up in arms because of the loss of constitutional guarantees which have been taken from him by the federal government. He would be outraged by the illegal usurpation of those rights by President Obama, the courts, and the Congress. He would be ashamed that he stands by and allows the practice of Christianity to be forbidden in violation to the Constitution.
An atheist? A Muslin? A socialist? Who knows. But the caller is certainly not someone who comes from the heritage which made this country great. Undoubtedly though, he is one who will complain the loudest when the freedom, liberty, and ethics brought to America by Christians has disappeared.
Whoever called the comment to 30 Seconds is allowed to his opinion, guaranteed by the First Amendment. He is also allowed the ignorance of what the Constitution is and its meaning to his well being. Once again it is proven that one doesn’t need the facts to have an opinion.
The comment is designed to make a point which is hidden, most likely with a political motive in mind. Considering the timing, it opens some questions, none of which will be answered by he who submitted it to the Times-Reporter.
The First Amendment says, “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 of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The statement made by the anonymous 30 Seconds submitter, is privileged by the First Amendment. But it is a half truth, a standard tactic for those who do not use logic to back up their statements. The rest of statement of the Amendment forbids prohibition of the free exercise of religion by the United States Congress.
To this point, the Congress has done neither. It has not tried to establish a national religion nor has it passed legislation to prohibit the free exercise of religion in the United States. United States courts have prohibited the free exercise of religion through bench legislation, the most blatant being the United States Supreme Court who has consistently ruled against the Second Amendment on every occasion the matter of religion has come before it.
The writers of the Constitution were specific in what they said. The terminology is concise and understandable. Congress shall make no law establishing nor prohibiting the practice of religion in the United States. It’s that simple. Federal courts rule on matters of the Constitution, the Supreme Court particularly, and in the case of the First Amendment, should rule only on the action which Congress takes, not on arguments which occur within the sovereign states. It’s called home rule and such matters belong under the jurisdiction of such states, not legislative federal courts..
Those who fear and attack Christianity, but apparently no other religion including Islam, are hard to fathom. The United States was founded by Christian believers who brought their beliefs and work ethics to a new world. They built it into the most powerful and productive country in the history of the world. It was not until the sixties when the Christian ethic began to be debased that the United States started into decline. There is no question, regardless of religious orientation, that the loss of the Judeo-Christian ethic which built this country, has produced disastrous social and economic results. Crime runs rampant in government. Lack of responsibility in the family has created a new class of poor, enslaved to the government, totally dependent on welfare payments, trapped in a life without hope.
The caller of the Times-Reporter article has an ax to grind which he does not explain. Not knowing what that ax is, opens inquiry into its interpretation. With the political situation being what it is, could this be a continuation of the debate as to whether a mosque should be built in downtown New York City to commemorate the successful murders of four thousand by Muslim terrorists? Perhaps he is the typical atheist who believes that Christ never existed, was not resurrected, and is a meaningless legend, but is so afraid that he is wrong in his belief that he fears even the mention of Jesus’ name? Or could it be possible that he really doesn’t understand what Christianity has done for this nation?
What other country has freely in the past done so much for so many people in so many countries? No country has provided the relief to stricken peoples without asking for something in return as we have. After the Second World War, we rebuilt the economies of our enemies. We have responded to disasters with aid and succor as no other nation has ever done. We have gone in harm’s way to protect those who could not protect themselves. We have liberated more people from oppression and helped them reconstruct their lives than any country which ever existed. And we did it because of a history of responsibility, honor, and hard work, all based on the Christian ethic.
If the caller believed the Constitution, and the First Amendment, was important, if he understood what they meant, he would not be complaining about Christianity, which he really is. Rather, he would be up in arms because of the loss of constitutional guarantees which have been taken from him by the federal government. He would be outraged by the illegal usurpation of those rights by President Obama, the courts, and the Congress. He would be ashamed that he stands by and allows the practice of Christianity to be forbidden in violation to the Constitution.
An atheist? A Muslin? A socialist? Who knows. But the caller is certainly not someone who comes from the heritage which made this country great. Undoubtedly though, he is one who will complain the loudest when the freedom, liberty, and ethics brought to America by Christians has disappeared.
Whoever called the comment to 30 Seconds is allowed to his opinion, guaranteed by the First Amendment. He is also allowed the ignorance of what the Constitution is and its meaning to his well being. Once again it is proven that one doesn’t need the facts to have an opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment