Archive for the ‘Religion’ Category

By Ronald Rodriguez

Constitution of the United States of America (Photo credit: The U.S. National Archives)
It does not take a casual observer much effort to realize that many people who have an anti religion agenda deliberately misinterpret American history. Thus, factual historical facts are simply “erased” to fit an ideology. This is an unfortunate practice of revisionist history as it is not an accurate approach to updating our known history with new facts.

There is a debate between two separate ideologies. The first ideology is the most accepted belief of American history, which believes that Christianity played no role in shaping the U.S. government. The second ideology, commonly accepted among-st Christians, insist on teaching ”traditional” history to their children.

The linchpin causing such debate around “traditional” history is that Christianity played a significant role in shaping the U.S. government and morals of the colonies and eventual young nation.

This is not an attempt to say that all the founders were devout followers of the Christian God or if they even believed in Him. It is not our right to judge the “walks” of our founders with God, but it is out right to defend what they did through their lives.

There are anti-religion quotes that revisionist’s find and use to argue that the founders were not christian. Thus, as a result, the U.S. is not a christian nation. The founders surely made statements that were critical of organized religion, but there is overwhelming evidence that almost all the founders believed in the Christian God and were members of established churches. Thus, it is not hard to believe that the founders used the principles of the Bible played help establish the U.S. government and a moral society

There is always a danger in history being interpreted with a broad brush of political activism today to fit an intellectual idea. Thus, it becomes important to dig deep into topics yourself and believe that history is best told by those that lived it and wrote about it. Considering this is the U.S. a nation under God or a nation not under God?

The Supreme Court was faced with the issue in 1892 with the case ”Church of the Holy Trinity v. U.S.“

The Court affirmed the religious nature of the U.S. This can be seen in opinion delivered by Justice David Josiah Brewer on the behalf of the Court that unanimously agreed. He stated the following:

[t]here is no dissonance in these declarations. There is a universal language pervading them all, having one meaning; they affirm and reaffirm that this is a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons: they are organic [legal, governmental] utterances; they speak the voice of the entire people. … These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.

The decision by the Supreme Court did not merely say that a majority of the American people were Christian, or that there were no Muslims, Hindus or other religious sects in America. Rather, Justice Brewer claimed it was the courts unanimous opinion that America is a Christian nation in “the domain of official action and recognition, [but not in regards to] individual acceptance.”

The Court’s decision demonstrates that our entire system of government was created with a responsibility to recognize the authority of the Christian God. Also, those who acknowledged the Christian God’s authority and committed to obey His commandments intended the government they created to acknowledge and obey God.

This decision is astonishing considering the nations rejection of Christianity’s role in its founding and government. As a result, it certainly is intriguing to consider how do we got from Supreme Court opinion to the doctrine of “separation of church and state.”

The “Church of the Holy Trinity v. U.S.” case was effectively overruled in 1931. As a result, the idea that government was “under God” was replaced with “separate” from God.

The doctrine of “separation of church and state” encompasses more than churches as it infers the separation of God and Government.

In 1989, the Supreme Court declared in its decision for “Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU” that “the Constitution mandates that the government remain secular.”

This is certainly a far stretch from any truth.

There is no piece of the Constitution that does or does not establish the U.S. government to ignore God’s authority.

The Case involving the Church of the Holy Trinity shows four points:

Each american colony was considered a Christian Theocracy from its earliest founding in the 1600′s.
The colonies had a universal agreement that the formation of civil government was a Biblical obligation – all the governments were Theocratic. The colonists formed governments with the belief that God commanded them to form them. Thus, the founding of a government was considered a religious act.
The federal government established under the U.S. Constitution were Christian Theocracies.
The ratification of the U.S. Constitution would never of occurred if the federal government had been given authority to prevent the U.S. from being “under God” and officially and legally acknowledging that they – the founders and colonies (states) – to be under His jurisdiction.
There are many statements by the founders in support of christian principles inclusion in the U.S. founding.
John Adams wrote a letter to Thomas Jefferson (June 28, 1813) which stated:
[t]he general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.” He also stated in a letter to the officers of the First Brigade, the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts that “[o]ur Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.
In the Notes on the State of Virginia (Query XVIII), Thomas Jefferson wrote:
God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever; That a revolution of the wheel of fortune, a change of situation, is among possible events; that it may become probable by Supernatural influence! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in that event.
In “The Trumpet Voice of Freedom: Patrick Henry of Virginia,” Henry is quoted stating

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.

I considered leaving concluding remarks to encompass my interpretation of these remarks, but I believe the best approach is to allow you to interpret what has been presented for yourself.

I hope you will take the time to dive into the history of this matter and voice what you find here for discussion.

A city in Maine has decided to enforce thousands of dollars in property taxes on a congregation because, its assessment board ruled, the church doesn’t qualify as a charity.

Aldersgate United Methodist Church in Rockland, Maine, filed suit in the Knox County Superior Court last month over a legal loophole that allows the city to charge taxes on the church’s driveway and parking lot, while exempting other non-profit organizations from the same costs.

“But the statute treats ‘houses of religious worship’ differently,” the ADF continues. “They are limited to the exemption of their church building, furniture, burial plots and a portion of the parsonage. No other not-for-profit is similarly limited.”

The inequitable treatment could be overlooked, the ADF claims, if the city would recognize the church as a form of charity and applied the broader exemption law. After all, the church serves many charitable functions, including the provision of religious and moral training, counseling, child-development services, volunteers for soup kitchens and homeless shelters and serves as the facility for a local orchestra, Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous and weddings, funerals, baptisms and so forth. The church even allows community groups to use the disputed parking lot for free.

But by a vote of 3-2, the Bangor Daily News reports, Rockland’s Board of Assessment Review rejected the church’s tax abatement request for the previous tax year.

The net result, according to calculations by the newspaper, is that Aldersgate United Methodist’s five acres of parking lot and driveway is being taxed $2,229 per year.

“Charities operate for the public benefit, train the hearts and minds of their hearers, relieve suffering, and, in sum, lessen the burden on the government. [Yet] the City insists that Aldersgate does not meet these qualifications,” ADF asserts. “But if this church does not qualify, the City would be hard-pressed to find an organization that does.”

The church’s lawsuit asks the court to declare that the way Rockland is implementing the tax law be found unconstitutional to the extent that it treats churches less favorably than secular organizations, an alleged violation of the First and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

ADF attorney Joel Oster makes the argument that a church shouldn’t be made to pay because its “charity work” isn’t secular.

“We think that because the city denied this church a charitable tax exemption, they are discriminating unfairly against this church,” Oster told OneNewsNow, “and they’re targeting this church because of its religion.”

“The law should be no respecter of persons, or charities,” ADF concludes. “Aldersgate should enjoy at least the same tax treatment and benefits granted to similar not-for-profit charitable organizations.”

Though Maine’s tax-law loophole may be unique, examples of churches facing cities with creative schemes to tax them are not.

As WND reported, the city of Mission, Kan., attempted to impose a “driveway tax” on the town’s churches based on an estimate of the number of people who would attend each church and use its parking lot in a given week.

Erik Stanley, a senior legal counsel for ADF, said when the case over the $1,000 city fees being charged to churches based on the number of seats in their sanctuaries was brought, that it was no less than punishment for the churches.

He said the “driveway tax” was outrageous and openly speculated whether a city successful in imposing such a cost also would be interested in a “sidewalk tax” based on the number of people who walk to church.

ADF sued on behalf of First Baptist Church of Mission and the Archdiocese of Kansas City. The Baptist church had been billed nearly $1,000 and the Catholic diocese billed some $1,700.

After the City of Mission elected to settle the case, rather than pursue the “driveway tax,” Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt issued a statement, albeit in a non-binding opinion, concluding that the fee actually is an “excise tax” and said state law bars Mission from imposing such a tax.

LYNCHBURG, Va. — Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith has shaped his life, but he barely mentioned it as he spoke to graduates at an evangelical Christian university Saturday.

And he barely touched on hot-button social issues like abortion and gay marriage, instead offering a broad-based defense of values like family and hard work.

“Culture — what you believe, what you value, how you live — matters,” Romney told graduates gathered in the football stadium on Liberty University’s campus in the Virginia mountains. “The American culture promotes personal responsibility, the dignity of work, the value of education, the merit of service, devotion to a purpose greater than self, and at the foundation, the preeminence of the family.”

Instead of a red-meat conservative policy speech, Romney discussed his own family and offered a defense of Christianity, saying that “there is no greater force for good in the nation than Christian conscience in action.” Still, he was inclusive: “Men and women of every faith, and good people with none at all, sincerely strive to do right and lead a purpose-driven life,” Romney said.

He had one sustained applause line in a 20-minute speech delivered days after President Barack Obama historically embraced gay marriage. “Marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman,” Romney said to a cheering crowd of students who have to follow a strict code of conduct that considers sex out of wedlock and homosexuality to be sins.

The late Rev. Jerry Falwell founded Liberty University in 1971 to be for evangelical Christians “what Notre Dame is to young Catholics and Brigham Young is to young Mormons,” as his son, University Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr., said on commencement day. It’s become a destination for Republican politicians looking to speak to the religious right, and Romney’s campaign team — planning the speech long before gay marriage became a central issue — viewed it as an opportunity to address the kind of socially conservative audience that had been wary of him during the prolonged GOP primary fight.

For Romney, the challenge is twofold. His past policy positions, including support for abortion rights, don’t sit well. But his personal faith is also an issue because many evangelicals don’t consider Mormons to be fellow Christians. Evangelicals are a critical segment of the GOP base; many of those voters backed his GOP rivals in the prolonged primary.

When he locks in the Republican presidential nomination, Romney will make history as the first Mormon nominee from a major party. His faith is central to him and to his family — he spent two years in France as a missionary, a time when he lived in occasionally primitive conditions. When he returned home, he attended Brigham Young University, a Mormon school, and married his wife, Ann, who had converted to Mormonism. As they built a life in Boston, Romney took on a significant leadership role in the church, serving as a lay pastor, fighting to build a temple in town, and counseling families in need.

But he’s mostly avoided talking about it on the campaign trail, largely avoiding religious forums and events throughout the primary season.

And at arguably the most religious venue he’s addressed during the campaign — since announcing his bid, Romney hasn’t made a public appearance in a church of any kind — he continued to keep his own faith in the background.

“This isn’t a speech about Mormonism,” senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom told reporters Friday on a conference call. Fehrnstrom pointed to the speech Romney gave in Texas in 2007 outlining his faith and defending religious freedom — the last time the former Massachusetts governor has addressed his faith in any detail.

Still, it was clear the campaign was keenly aware of the overtones. Romney was introduced by Mark DeMoss, an evangelical who has repeatedly defended Romney’s faith on the campaign trail. “I suspect I won’t agree with Mitt Romney on everything, but I will tell you this: I trust him. I trust him to do the right thing,” said DeMoss, who went on with a lengthy testament to Romney’s values.

Despite the concern, surveys have shown for months now that whatever reservations Republican evangelicals have about Romney’s faith, they are likely to back him in a general election.

A spokesman for Liberty said that Romney is not the first Mormon to speak at a university commencement. “This is our 29th commencement speaker, and 21 of those 39 speakers would not necessarily meet Liberty’s doctrinal theological statement,” said the spokesman, Johnnie Moore, explaining that anyone who teaches at the university is held to that doctrinal standard.

Romney’s selection as commencement speaker was an issue for some students who graduated from Liberty this weekend. When the school announced Romney as commencement speaker, hundreds of angry comments were posted on Liberty’s Facebook page by people who said they were students or alumni, objecting to giving a Mormon a platform. The school responded by affirming its welcome to Romney.

“There was some concern in my family, yes,” because of Romney’s Mormonism, said Robert Maginnis, a retired Army colonel whose nephew is a member of the 2012 class.

Ahead of Romney’s remarks, University Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr. said the school’s invitation to him should not be considered an endorsement. He noted that his father, the school’s founder, said that Christians should vote for the candidate who shares their political positions “not the candidate that shares his or her faith or theology.”

Read more on Newsmax.com: Romney Tells Liberty Students to Honor Family Commitments

Rick Warren: Obama Contraception Policy Endangers Religious Freedom

Acclaimed evangelical minister and best-selling author Rick Warren slammed the Obama administration’s approach to contraception and debt Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

Warren told interviewer Jake Tapper that he is not satisfied with the administration’s compromise on a requirement that religious-affiliated organizations provide contraception coverage to employees, and said religious freedom is at stake.

“The issue here is not about women’s health,” Warren said. “There is a greater principle, and that is do you have the right to decide what your faith practices?”

Story continues below video.

The original ruling from the administration required religious-affiliated universities and hospitals to offer health plans that cover contraception; under the compromise, insurance companies have to pay for that part of the coverage.

Warren, who spoke at Obama’s 2009 inauguration, also criticized the president’s economic policies even as he said Obama alone is not to blame for the nation’s woes.

“Most people would not think they’re better off economically than they were four years ago,” said Warren. Asked who he holds responsible, he blamed an array of people.

Here’s some of the interview:

TAPPER: You’ve written about this, especially on Twitter … a great deal when it comes to the Obama administration’s healthcare ruling when it pertains to contraception. You objected to that initially. They dialed it back. How are you with what they called an accommodation? Were you okay with that? Or no?

WARREN: Well, no, I’m not, because in the first place, there is a redefinition from freedom of religion to phrases — now you hear people talking about freedom of worship. That means it’s limiting what the church does to only what happens in the one hour on Sunday morning as worship. In other words, if I have a school, which is part of my commission as a church, education, or if I had a clinic which is part of my — the Bible says Jesus went into every village, preaching, teaching, and healing. He didn’t just care about the spirit. He cared about the mind and the body, and you go into almost any country, the first school and the first hospital were founded by the missionaries, almost every country in the world. You go to Africa, 25 percent of the healthcare is done by Catholics.

WARREN: Now people are starting to frame this as women’s health issue. I’m 100 percent in favor of women’s health, obviously. But the issue here is not about women’s health. There is a greater principle, and that is do you have a right to decide what your faith practices? I would be just as opposed to someone making a law that says every Jewish deli now has to serve pork. Well, I would be — I would protest that. Why? There are 100 other delis you can get pork at. Why do I have to insist that the Jewish delis also serve pork? There’s plenty of places to get contraceptives.

WARREN: Now I don’t have a problem with contraceptives. I’m a Protestant. I’m an evangelical. But I do support my Catholic brothers and sisters to believe what they want to believe. And I would support my Jewish brothers and sisters to believe what they want to believe, and say if you say we don’t eat pork, we don’t want to serve it in our deli, then you shouldn’t have to serve it in your deli, because there’s plenty of other places to get pork.

TAPPER: But as far as you’re concerned, does that — you think that should apply beyond houses of worship, but houses of worship are already exempt?

WARREN: The Constitution says freedom of religion, not just freedom of worship. And churches, synagogues, mosques do far more than worship. In fact, if you took out all of the social services provided by Christian churches, and for that matter synagogues and mosques, too, America would go bankrupt in about six months, because the vast amount of social services, the free clinics and the feeding the poor and caring for the sick and educating the next generation is done a lot by these religious organizations. And they should not have to say, well, I have to put my religion on the shelf to care for people.

TAPPER: So you believe that this should also apply to — this exemption should apply to religious schools — religious charities…

WARREN: I do…

TAPPER: But just to clarify, the accommodation, as the administration calls it, doesn’t require the Catholic charities or the Jewish schools or the Protestant …

WARREN: So here’s the dirty little secret about that. It says we’re going to put it onto the insurers .

TAPPER: Right. Insurance companies have to …

WARREN: Most or many religious organizations insure themselves. We insure ourselves here at Saddleback Church. I have 350 staff. We have a self-insurance program, where we do our own insurance. So we’re basically robbing from ourselves to pay for ourselves.

Special: Should Obama’s Health Plan Be Overturned? Vote Here Now!

TAPPER: But weren’t you already required to do this under California law?

WARREN: That’s not the issue. The issue is on a national level, on a national level, to start limiting churches and their organizations, the church and organizations — or any organizations, whether it’s Christian or not — in what they believe that that limits what they do with their school or their health care, that is a violation of the First Amendment, in my opinion.
© 2012 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Bishop denounces Obama: following path of Hitler and Stalin

by Joel McDurmon on Apr 19, 2012
The Washington Examiner reports,

In a homily delivered Saturday, Bishop Daniel R. Jenky of the Diocese of Peoria, Illinois challenged President Obama’s HHS mandate, suggesting that the president was following the same path as Hitler and Stalin.

“Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services, and health care,” Jenky said. “In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama – with his radical, pro abortion and extreme secularist agenda, now seems intent on following a similar path.” Jenky added.

’GEORGE SOROS‘ SAYS BIBLE HAS ’MORAL’ & ‘FACTUAL’ FLAWS; TOUTS HIS VISION FOR SECULARISM
Millionaire atheist Todd Stiefel is on a godless mission — literally. The businessman-turned full-time atheist activist is devoting his life to the dissemination of freethought and to the righting of what he sees as discriminatory wrongs against members of the atheist, agnostic and freethinking community.

The Blaze recently interviewed the multimillionaire to gain perspective on his work and to better understand his role in the growth and increasing organization of the secularist movement.

Stiefel, who has given millions toward atheist causes and who considers himself to be Republican-leaning, is a “George Soros” of sorts for the secular community. In addition to allocating funds for numerous freethinking organizations, the Reason Rally and the Rock Beyond Belief, Stiefel is serving on advisory boards and providing non-fiscal advice to movement leaders. Through The Stiefel Freethought Foundation (SFF), the 37-year-old businessman is serving as an atheist philanthropist extraordinaire (he’s devoted $3.5 million to related causes).

SFF gave $250,000 toward the Reason Rally (which The Blaze covered extensively) and another $70,000 toward Rock Beyond Belief (read about this latter event here). Plainly stated: He’s a key player, asset and organizer for the atheist cause. During a 90-minute interview with The Blaze, Stiefel shared a plethora of information and perspective. While many would potentially dismiss him as offensive or irreverent like many of the other leaders in the atheist movement, Stiefel takes a different, more respectful approach.

Using Less-Abrasive Tactics

When asked about his tactics and why they aren’t as biting as those adopted by scientist Richard Dawkins and Freedom From Religion Foundation Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor, among others, Stiefel answered the question respectfully.

As government grows, the separation of church and state is replaced by the state as church—an established religion of sacred secularism that crowds any rivals out of the public square

So Health Commissar Kathleen Sebelius has decided that, under Obamacare, religious institutions like other employers will be required to offer their workers free contraception, sterilization and abortifacients.
Well there’s a suprise.
This entirely predictable news was received with stunned bewilderment by Obamaphile rubes such as the Reverend John Jenkins of Notre Dame, who in 2009 gave the president both an honorary degree and his imprimatur in exchange for the promise of a “sensible” approach to conflicts between church and state. Now that they’re on the receiving end of Obama’s good sense, many of America’s Catholic bishops have issued protests, characteristically anguished and hand-wringing but betraying little understand­ing of the stakes.
In a land of Big Government, every­thing else gets real small. In the U.S., the Catholic Church, aside from abortion, is generally on board with the “social jus­tice” agenda. It never seemed to occur to them to ask themselves, If health care is a “human right” in the debased contem­porary sense (i.e., not a restraint upon the state—as in Magna Carta—but a gift of the state), then who gets to define what health care is?
Answer: Commissar Sebelius. As government grows, the separation of church and state is replaced by the state as church—an established religion of sacred secularism that crowds any rivals out of the public square. The Obama administration’s distinction—of a “religious exemption” that applies to a building where sermons and sacraments are tak­ing place but not to Catholic hospitals or schools—is explic­itly intended to shrivel the space for religious belief: If you’re in, say, the adoption business, you can either offer your ser­vices to gay couples or get out of the biz entirely. Either way, the state church wins. Religion is fine as a private code that you deposit in the umbrella stand as you exit your house every morning, but it may not govern your conduct beyond your front door. If you insist on being Catholic, you must be Catholic in the sense of a Kerryesque Democrat on the stump: “Of course, I’m personally, passionately, deeply, pas­sionately, personally opposed to abortion, but I would never dream of letting my deeply passionately personal beliefs interfere with my legislative agenda.”
So throughout the Western world, when parents object to kindergartners’ being taught about the joys of same-sex marriage, they’re told by the school board: Tough. That’s just the way it is. You uptight squares need to get with the beat.
Except: There is one conspicuous holdout against the sec­ularist enforcers. When Muslim parents in Bristol, England, raised a fuss about their grade-schoolers’ being fed gay mar-
in the curriculum, a pannicked administration yanked the books in nothing flat. If it’s a choice between Heather Has Two Mommies and Heather Has Four Mommies and a Big Bearded Daddy Who Wants to Marry Her Off to a Cousin Back in Pakistan, bet on the latter.
As Commissar Sebelius was laying down the law to Amer­ican Catholics, a Montreal couple and their son were convicted of a multiple “honor killing.” Immigrants from Afghanistan, the Shafias had coolly plotted around the kitchen table the murder of all three of their daughters (plus one of the father’s wives), and then carried it out, by drown­ing them in the Rideau Canal near King­ston, Ontario—for the crime of wishing to live as North American teenage girls. The father was caught on tape saying, “May the devil s* *t on their graves!”—which he gamely attempted on the witness stand to pass off as some sort of traditional greet­ing in Dari.
Zainab, Sahar, and Geeti Shafia had told various teachers, social workers, and police officers that they were being beat­en, that they wanted to be placed in foster homes, and that their parents and brother were planning to kill them. And in every instance the en­forcers of the secular state prioritized deference to Islam over the fate of the girls. They still do. The court rescheduled its Friday sittings to accommodate Muslim prayers. And, in striking contrast to, say, the Matthew Shepard murder, the media coverage of the case was inordinately preoccupied with emphasizing that no broader conclusions should be drawn about Islam’s attitude to women.
In other words, Islam seems to be finding it a lot easier than Catholicism to get a “religious exemption.” Here’s a caption from the Toronto Star accompanying a picture of the cafeteria at a local public school: “At Valley Park Middle School, Muslim students participate in the Friday prayer service. Menstruating girls, at the very back, do not take part.”
Yes, that’s right. At the cafeteria of a taxpayer-funded school in North America in the early 21st century, the boys enter through the main door and sit in the front row; the girls, being inferior, enter through a rear door and sit behind them; and the menstruating girls, being unclean, sit at the very back and are forbidden to participate. The school board says relax, there’s nothing to see here: So many Muslim kids were bunk­ing off to the local mosque for Friday prayers and coming in late for transgender-history class or whatever, it made more sense to give the imam the cafeteria to hold his prayers in. How’s that for a “sensible” balance?
So the good news for the Reverend Jenkins et al. is that the big-government one-size-fits-all secular state is actually quite easy to drive a coach and horses through. The bad
news is the guys willing to climb on the buckboard and take the reins marriage, they’re told by the school board: Tough. That’s just the way it is. You uptight squares need to get with the beat.

Is President Barack Obama America’s most “Biblically-hostile U.S. president?” This is the label that conservative historian David Barton has given Obama, as the nation continues its debate over the president’s controversial contraceptive mandate.

But for Barton, the situation transcends the current discussion about religious freedom and the Catholic Church, as the frequent guest on Glenn Beck’s radio and television shows develops his provocative argument in detail. He writes:

When one observes President Obama’s unwillingness to accommodate America’s four-century long religious conscience protection through his attempts to require Catholics to go against their own doctrines and beliefs, one is tempted to say that he is anti-Catholic. But that characterization would not be correct. Although he has recently singled out Catholics, he has equally targeted traditional Protestant beliefs over the past four years. So since he has attacked Catholics and Protestants, one is tempted to say that he is anti-Christian. But that, too, would be inaccurate. He has been equally disrespectful in his appalling treatment of religious Jews in general and Israel in particular. So perhaps the most accurate description of his antipathy toward Catholics, Protestants, religious Jews, and the Jewish nation would be to characterize him as anti-Biblical. And then when his hostility toward Biblical people of faith is contrasted with his preferential treatment of Muslims and Muslim nations, it further strengthens the accuracy of the anti-Biblical descriptor. In fact, there have been numerous clearly documented times when his pro-Islam positions have been the cause of his anti-Biblical actions.When one observes President Obama’s unwillingness to accommodate America’s four-century long religious conscience protection through his attempts to require Catholics to go against their own doctrines and beliefs, one is tempted to say that he is anti-Catholic. But that characterization would not be correct. Although he has recently singled out Catholics, he has equally targeted traditional Protestant beliefs over the past four years. So since he has attacked Catholics and Protestants, one is tempted to say that he is anti-Christian. But that, too, would be inaccurate. He has been equally disrespectful in his appalling treatment of religious Jews in general and Israel in particular. So perhaps the most accurate description of his antipathy toward Catholics, Protestants, religious Jews, and the Jewish nation would be to characterize him as anti-Biblical. And then when his hostility toward Biblical people of faith is contrasted with his preferential treatment of Muslims and Muslim nations, it further strengthens the accuracy of the anti-Biblical descriptor. In fact, there have been numerous clearly documented times when his pro-Islam positions have been the cause of his anti-Biblical actions.

Listed below in chronological order are (1) numerous records of his attacks on Biblical persons or organizations; (2) examples of the hostility toward Biblical faith that have become evident in the past three years in the Obama-led military; (3) a listing of his open attacks on Biblical values; and finally (4) a listing of numerous incidents of his preferential deference for Islam’s activities and positions, including letting his Islamic advisors guide and influence his hostility toward people of Biblical faith.

1. Acts of hostility toward people of Biblical faith:

April 2008 – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” 1

February 2009 – Obama announces plans to revoke conscience protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical activities that go against their beliefs, and fully implements the plan in February 2011. 2

April 2009 – When speaking at Georgetown University, Obama orders that a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name be covered when he is making his speech. 3

May 2009 – Obama declines to host services for the National Prayer Day (a day established by federal law) at the White House. 4

April 2009 – In a deliberate act of disrespect, Obama nominated three pro-abortion ambassadors to the Vatican; of course, the pro-life Vatican rejected all three. 5

October 19, 2010 – Obama begins deliberately omitting the phrase about “the Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence – an omission he has made on no less than seven occasions. 6

November 2010 – Obama misquotes the National Motto, saying it is “E pluribus unum” rather than “In God We Trust” as established by federal law. 7

January 2011 – After a federal law was passed to transfer a WWI Memorial in the Mojave Desert to private ownership, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the cross in the memorial could continue to stand, but the Obama administration refused to allow the land to be transferred as required by law, and refused to allow the cross to be re-erected as ordered by the Court. 8

February 2011 – Although he filled posts in the State Department, for more than two years Obama did not fill the post of religious freedom ambassador, an official that works against religious persecution across the world; he filled it only after heavy pressure from the public and from Congress. 9

April 2011 – For the first time in American history, Obama urges passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring. 10

August 2011 – The Obama administration releases its new health care rules that override religious conscience protections for medical workers in the areas of abortion and contraception. 11

November 2011 – Obama opposes inclusion of President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial. 12

November 2011 – Unlike previous presidents, Obama studiously avoids any religious references in his Thanksgiving speech. 13

December 2011 – The Obama administration denigrates other countries’ religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights. 14

January 2012 – The Obama administration argues that the First Amendment provides no protection for churches and synagogues in hiring their pastors and rabbis. 15

February 2012 – The Obama administration forgives student loans in exchange for public service, but announces it will no longer forgive student loans if the public service is related to religion. 16
2. Acts of hostility from the Obama-led military toward people of Biblical faith:

June 2011 – The Department of Veterans Affairs forbids references to God and Jesus during burial ceremonies at Houston National Cemetery. 17

August 2011 – The Air Force stops teaching the Just War theory to officers in California because the course is taught by chaplains and is based on a philosophy introduced by St. Augustine in the third century AD – a theory long taught by civilized nations across the world (except America). 18

September 2011 – Air Force Chief of Staff prohibits commanders from notifying airmen of programs and services available to them from chaplains. 19

September 2011 – The Army issues guidelines for Walter Reed Medical Center stipulating that “No religious items (i.e. Bibles, reading materials and/or facts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit.” 20

November 2011 – The Air Force Academy rescinds support for Operation Christmas Child, a program to send holiday gifts to impoverished children across the world, because the program is run by a Christian charity. 21

November 2011 – The Air Force Academy pays $80,000 to add a Stonehenge-like worship center for pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans. 22

February 2012 – The U. S. Military Academy at West Point disinvites three star Army general and decorated war hero Lieutenant General William G. (“Jerry”) Boykin (retired) from speaking at an event because he is an outspoken Christian. 23

February 2012 – The Air Force removes “God” from the patch of Rapid Capabilities Office (the word on the patch was in Latin: Dei). 24

February 2012 – The Army orders Catholic chaplains not to read a letter to parishioners that their archbishop asked them to read. 25

3. Acts of hostility toward Biblical values:

January 2009 – Obama lifts restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad, forcing taxpayers to fund pro-abortion groups that either promote or perform abortions in other nations. 26

January 2009 – President Obama’s nominee for deputy secretary of state asserts that American taxpayers are required to pay for abortions and that limits on abortion funding are unconstitutional. 27

March 2009 – The Obama administration shut out pro-life groups from attending a White House-sponsored health care summit. 28

March 2009 – Obama orders taxpayer funding of embryonic stem cell research. 29

March 2009 – Obama gave $50 million for the UNFPA, the UN population agency that promotes abortion and works closely with Chinese population control officials who use forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations. 30

May 2009 – The White House budget eliminates all funding for abstinence-only education and replaces it with “comprehensive” sexual education, repeatedly proven to increase teen pregnancies and abortions. 31 He continues the deletion in subsequent budgets. 32

May 2009 – Obama officials assemble a terrorism dictionary calling pro-life advocates violent and charging that they use racism in their “criminal” activities. 33

July 2009 – The Obama administration illegally extends federal benefits to same-sex partners of Foreign Service and Executive Branch employees, in direction violation of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. 34

September 16, 2009 – The Obama administration appoints as EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum, who asserts that society should “not tolerate” any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, if they may negatively affect homosexual “equality.” 35

July 2010 – The Obama administration uses federal funds in violation of federal law to get Kenya to change its constitution to include abortion. 36

August 2010 – The Obama administration Cuts funding for 176 abstinence education programs. 37

September 2010 – The Obama administration tells researchers to ignore a judge’s decision striking down federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. 38

February 2011 – Obama directs the Justice Department to stop defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act. 39

March 2011 – The Obama administration refuses to investigate videos showing Planned Parenthood helping alleged sex traffickers get abortions for victimized underage girls. 40

July 2011 – Obama allows homosexuals to serve openly in the military, reversing a policy originally instituted by George Washington in March 1778. 41

September 2011 – The Pentagon directs that military chaplains may perform same-sex marriages at military facilities in violation of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. 42

October 2011 – The Obama administration eliminates federal grants to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for their extensive programs that aid victims of human trafficking because the Catholic Church is anti-abortion. 43
4. Acts of preferentialism for Islam:

May 2009 – While Obama does not host any National Day of Prayer event at the White House, he does host White House Iftar dinners in honor of Ramadan. 44

April 2010 – Christian leader Franklin Graham is disinvited from the Pentagon’s National Day of Prayer Event because of complaints from the Muslim community. 45

April 2010 – The Obama administration requires rewriting of government documents and a change in administration vocabulary to remove terms that are deemed offensive to Muslims, including jihad, jihadists, terrorists, radical Islamic, etc. 46

August 2010 – Obama speaks with great praise of Islam and condescendingly of Christianity. 47

August 2010 – Obama went to great lengths to speak out on multiple occasions on behalf of building an Islamic mosque at Ground Zero, while at the same time he was silent about a Christian church being denied permission to rebuild at that location. 48

2010 – While every White House traditionally issues hundreds of official proclamations and statements on numerous occasions, this White House avoids traditional Biblical holidays and events but regularly recognizes major Muslim holidays, as evidenced by its 2010 statements on Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr, Hajj, and Eid-ul-Adha. 49

October 2011 – Obama’s Muslim advisers block Middle Eastern Christians’ access to the White House. 50

February 2012 – The Obama administration makes effulgent apologies for Korans being burned by the U. S. military, 51 but when Bibles were burned by the military, numerous reasons were offered why it was the right thing to do. 52

Many of these actions are literally unprecedented – this is the first time they have happened in four centuries of American history. The hostility of President Obama toward Biblical faith and values is without equal from any previous American president

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a House panel Thursday that a reduction in the number of human beings born in the United States will compensate employers and insurers for the cost of complying with the new HHS mandate that will require all health-care plans to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception,” Sebelius said. She went on to say the estimated cost is “down not up.”

Sebelius took questions from the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health about President Barack Obama’s fiscal year 2013 budget proposal.Because the Catholic church teaches that sterilization, contraception or abortion are wrong and that Catholics must not be inolved in them, the regulation forces Catholics–and members of other religious denominations that share those views–to act against the teachings of their faith. Numerous lawsuits have already been asserting that the rule violates the First Amendment’s guarantee to the free exercise of religion. Many of the nation’s Catholic bishops have published letters saying: “We cannot–we will not–comply with this unjust law.”

Sebelius, however, insisted that the mandate “upholds religious liberty.”
“The rule which we intend to promulgate in the near future around implementation will require insurance companies, not a religious employer, but the insurance company to provide coverage for contraceptives,” Sebelius told the subcommittee.

The Catholic bishops have called for the regulation to be rescinded in its entirety, so that no employer, insurer or individual is forced to act against his or her conscience.

During the subcommittee hearing, Rep. Tim Murphy (R-Pa.) said that contraception provided by insurance companies to people employed by religious organizations under the future form of the rule Sebelius described would not be was not free.

“Who pays for it? There’s no such thing as a free service,” Murphy asked.

Sebelius responded that that is not the case with insurance.

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for cost of contraception,” Sebelius answered.

Murphy expressed surprise by the answer.

“So you are saying, by not having babies born, we are going to save money on health care?” Murphy asked.

Sebelius replied, “Providing contraception is a critical preventive health benefit for women and for their children.”

Murphy again sought clarification.

“Not having babies born is a critical benefit. This is absolutely amazing to me. I yield back,” he said.

Sebelius responded, “Family planning is a critical health benefit in this country, according to the Institute of Medicine.”

Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), a member of the subcommittee, said after the hearing that if mandating contraception saves money there shouldn’t be a need for a mandate.

“Their argument is this: Health insurance companies will offer it for free because they make money. You reduce the number of people getting pregnant therefore you reduce the cost of pregnancy, or low birth weight pregnancies or other kind of pregnancies,” Guthrie told CNSNews.com.

“If you think about it, why don’t health insurance companies provide it now if the argument is health insurance companies are going to make a lot of money? If the health insurance companies were really acting in their own best interest, they would be giving these pills out for free, if it really saved money,” Guthrie added.

Despite the controversy over whether the mandate is constitutional, Sebelius told Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) during the hearing that the administration never sought a legal opinion about the regulation from the Department of Justice.

A legal expert, a former Navy chaplain, and a pro-family leader agree that a Pennsylvania judge should be removed from the bench for throwing out an assault case lodged against a Muslim who attacked an atheist dressed as a zombie Muhammad at a Halloween parade last year.

Judge Mark Martin is an Iraq war veteran and a convert to Islam, according to George Washington University law professor Jonathon Turley. The incident, recorded on video, occurred on October 11, 2011 at the Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania Halloween parade. Ernie Perce, an atheist, was attacked by Talaag Elbayomy, a Muslim, because of the former’s costume.

Judge Martin threw out video evidence of the assault, dismissed the testimony of an eyewitness officer, and then lectured the atheist victim about the sensitivities of the Muslim culture. He stated in court that Elbayomy was obligated to attack the victim because of his culture and religion.

“They are so immersed in it,” he said. “And what you’ve done is you’ve completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very, very, very offensive. I’m a Muslim. I find it offensive.”

Gordon Klingenschmitt is a former Navy chaplain who was forced out of the service for publicly praying in Jesus’ name while in uniform. He now runs “The Pray In Jesus Name Project” and says the judge is basically conveying the message that if you mock Muhammad, you deserve to get beaten.

“He freed the Muslim attacker and said basically it’s okay to choke atheists if they insult Islam,” he comments.

Klingenschmitt also finds it outrageous that Judge Martin told Perce that mocking Muhammad in Muslim countries is punishable by death.

“This is a different country. We live in America where we have a free society,” the former Navy chaplain points out. “And Christians have historically protected the rights of minorities to express their religious or anti-religious views.”

So he believes Martin should be removed from the bench, and Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel agrees. The latter tells OneNewsNow Judge Martin’s decision an indication of what may be coming if sharia is used in the U.S. court systems.

“This particular judge actually had the audacity to rule in favor of the attacker, saying that the attacker was compelled to attack this individual because it was an insult to Islam and the Prophet Muhammad,” Staver reports.

And Diane Gramley, head of the American Family Association (AFA) of Pennsylvania, suggests that the judge’s religion “tainted” how he looks at the law.

“That definitely changes everything, because if he’s a Muslim convert, then that definitely has tainted his view of the law, and he is looking at sharia law and making his decision,” she offers. “You cannot look at a situation where a Muslim has physically harassed, physically attacked an atheist — granted the guy’s an atheist who’s in a parade; he’s dressed as a Muslim — but that’s not against the law.”

Staver finds the ruling to be almost unbelievable.

“This situation is one involving a judge that needs to be removed from the bench,” the attorney suggests. “He is clearly instituting sharia from the bench, using sharia law as a basis to ultimately acquit a person who actually committed an assault and a battery against an individual.”

Professor Turley also notes that another atheist, dressed as a zombie Pope, was marching beside the zombie Muhammad, but no outraged Catholics attacked him.

“If a Christian had been doing the harassing, I don’t believe the judge would have dismissed those charges,” Gramley contends. “I think in this case, Judge Martin is showing preference to the Muslim.”

Staver concludes that this is the type of case that has prompted several states, including Oklahoma, to work on legislation to prohibit courts from using sharia or foreign laws and court rulings as a basis for decisions in American courts. In Oklahoma’s case, however, the measure was overturned in federal court.

The controversy over the Obama administration’s contraception mandate is at a boiling point, as many Catholic leaders continue to view the president’s so-called “accommodation” as a failure to protect religious liberty.

Now, Glenn Beck is coming forward with a new movement called “We Are All Catholics Now.” The main goal of the initiative is to ask Americans to reach out to Congressional leaders (at the moment, Senators) to encourage the passage of legislation that would protect religious groups’ conscience rights.

Watch Beck discuss the effort on his radio show this morning:

The main push, Beck says, is to support the highway transportation bill, which will likely be voted upon this week. It will include an amendment – Blunt Conscience Protection Amendment – from Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) that would protect religious conscience rights. In the House, Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) is working on companion legislation, though it may not be voted on for a few weeks.

Beck is encouraging individuals to get involved by calling their Senators and letting them know that “we are all Catholics now.” The issue at hand is not about contraception as it has been framed by many media outlets, he says. Instead, it is a religious freedom issue that hinges upon the separation of church and state’s mandate that the government not force churches to violate their values and principles.

Here are his directions for getting involved and making an impact:

Call the Capitol and speak with your Senator. The numbers are: 202.224.3121; 202.225.3121; the toll free numbers for the Capitol Switchboard include: 1-866-220-0044 1-877-851-6437, 1-800-833-6354, 1-888-355-3588, 1-866-808-0065, 1-877-762-8762, 1-800-862-5530.
Call the switchboard, ask to be connected to a Senator from your specific state (it will take two calls, one for each Senator).
Whoever answers:
1. Tell them that you want to tell the Senator to vote for the Blunt conscience protection amendment.
2. Ask them if they know how the Senator will vote on that amendment
3. Tell them you want to be contacted back about how he voted (be sure to ask for accountability — they hate it, but it makes them call you back).
4. When you call, be sure to tell them “We are all Catholics now”. This key phrase will let them know you are part of a larger, organized movement working in support of religious freedom.
You can read more about the movement at GlennBeck.com.

Meet the Mosquebusters — or as they’re officially known, the Law and Freedom Foundation – a group of anti-Islamic vigilantes in Britain with a subtler approach than their peers: Rather than picket Mosque sites, or lead demonstrations of any kind, they sue under Britain’s byzantine legal code to make it illegal for those Mosques to be built in the first place.

Anti-Islamic sentiment in Britain is not new. Groups such as such as England Is Ours and Stop Islamisation of Europe have, for some time, been defending what they see as traditional British/Western culture against a group they see as closeted Islamic extremists who will kill “infidels” or take slaves at the drop of a hat. In fact, they believe that the Koran urges precisely that. Some — like the English Defence League (EDL) — verge on paramilitary fascism in their use of tactics.

Others simply run around in public yelling incendiary phrases. The Mosquebusters, however, are apparently clever enough to avoid those obvious trappings of pro-Western resistance. Foreign Policy Magazine describes their approach as “a war against Islam, but one that often resembles a bureaucratic turf battle more than a clash of civilizations.”

Their leader, who calls himself “The Lawman,” also takes a subtler approach to the question of fighting Islamic influence in Britain. Rather than play into liberal stereotypes of “Islamophobia” and racism, he makes it very clear up front that what concerns him is Islamic doctrine, not people. From his manifesto:

“It is primarily about the division between Islamic and non-Islamic society, and the lawless violence at the heart of Islamic doctrine and practice.”

The Rev. Franklin Graham says President Barack Obama has “given Islam a pass,” including ignoring atrocities against Christians in the Muslim world — so much so that the evangelist says he cannot “categorically” say Obama is not a Muslim.

In a stunning interview with MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Tuesday, the renowned Christian leader and son of the Rev. Billy Graham expressed shock that Obama was doing little to protect Christians across the Muslim world against a wave of persecution.

MSNBC’s liberal hosts were flummoxed by Graham’s strong rebuke of Obama, and they asked him whether he believes the president is a Christian.

“You have to ask that of President Obama,” Graham shot back. “You can ask me do I believe you’re a Christian. I think people have to ask Barack Obama. He’s come out saying he’s a Christian. So I think the question is, what is a Christian?”

Graham said he asked Obama about his faith when he was first running for president.

Graham related their conversation: “He said that he was working on the south side of Chicago in the community and they asked him what church he went to.

“He said I don’t go to church. Then they said if you are going to work in our community you have to join one of the churches. Then, of course, he joined Reverend Jeremiah’s church. So that’s what his answer to my question was.”

Again queried about Obama’s faith, Graham repeated: “You have to ask him. I cannot answer that question for anybody. All I know is I’m a sinner and that God has forgiven me of my sins because I put my faith and trust in Jesus Christ.”

Graham added that he accepts Obama’s claim he’s a Christian at face value, but said ultimately only God knows his heart.

He did note that Obama has shown strong empathy toward Muslims, and the president has an Islamic background.

“Under Islamic law, under Shariah law, Islam sees him as a son of Islam, because his father was a Muslim, his grandfather was a Muslim, his great-grandfather was a Muslim,” Graham said.

“So under Islamic law, the Muslim world sees President Obama as a Muslim, as a son of Islam. That’s just the way it works. That’s the way they see him.”

Asked whether he believes Obama is “categorically not a Muslim,” Graham said, “I can’t say categorically because Islam has gotten a free a pass under Obama.”

Graham noted that Obama’s Middle East policies have helped Islamists while hurting Christian minorities throughout the region.

“We see the Arab Spring, and coming out of the Arab Spring, the Islamists are taking control of the Middle East. And people like [Hosni] Mubarak was a dictator, but he kept the peace with Israel and the Christian minorities in Egypt were protected.

“Now those Christian minorities throughout the entire Arab world are under attack. A Newsweek magazine cover story last week [was about] was the massacre of Christians in the Islamic world. From Europe all the way through the Middle East to Africa into East Asia, Muslims are killing Christians.

“The president can come out and make a statement demanding that if these countries do not protect their minorities, no more foreign aid from the United States. They are not protecting the minorities. The society in these Islamic countries is not protecting the Christians anymore.”

Graham added: “And hopefully, the people that are in power are going to protect the minorities, and Christians in the Muslim world are the minority. Egypt is like 13 million in the minority. Nigeria is 80-some million, but they’re still a minority.

“These Christians are having their churches burned. They’re being raped. Women are being raped. They’re being murdered. Because under Shariah law Muslims can take a Christian’s property, take a Christian’s life, can take his daughter. And this is what is happening. The governments are not able to protect the minorities in the society. And they’re unwilling to protect them. If a government is not going to protect the minorities, we should not give them one dollar of U.S. aid.”

Graham claimed Obama is doing little to nothing to help persecuted Christians.

“And he’s got the power of the White House,” Graham complained. “He could be speaking to these countries right now, demanding that they protect the Christians in those countries. He’s been quiet about it.

“We have an aid station in Southern Sudan. The Sudanese dropped bombs on it right before Christmas. We have a Bible school. Just two weeks ago the Sudanese air force dropped eight bombs on that Bible school. Why doesn’t the president come out and try to bring peace to the Sudan?”
© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Rev. Franklin Graham: Obama Helps Islamists, Ignores Christian Persecution

CATHOLIC CHURCH REJECTS SURRENDER TERMS FROM OBAMA

By Cliff Kincaid

My Catholic priest, Father Larry Swink, delivered a homily on Sunday that I told him would make headlines. In the toughest sermon I have ever heard from a pulpit, he attacked the Obama Administration as evil, even demonic, and warned of religious persecution ahead. What was also newsworthy about the sermon was that he cited The Washington Post in agreement—not on the subject of the Obama Administration being evil, but on the matter of its abridgment of the constitutional right to freedom of religion.

What is happening is extraordinary and unprecedented. The Catholic Church is in open revolt against the Obama Administration, with Fr. Swink noting from the pulpit that priests across the archdiocese were joining the call on Sunday to rally Catholics to resistance against the U.S. Government. He said we are entering a time of religious persecution and that Catholics and others will have to make a final decision about which side they are on.

The issue is what the Catholic Bishops have called a “literally unconscionable” edict by the Obama Administration demanding that sterilization, abortifacients and contraception be included in virtually all health plans.

At a time when the media are full of reports about who is ahead and behind in the polls, and who will win the next Republican presidential primary, this incredible uprising in the Catholic Church is something that could not only overshadow the political campaign season, but also may have a major impact on the ultimate outcome—if Republicans know how to handle it. This matter goes beyond partisan politics to the growing perception of an unconstitutional Obama Administration assault on religious freedom. To hear the Catholic Bishops and Priests describe it, our constitutional republic and our freedoms hang in the balance.

The administration claims there is a religious exemption in the mandate, but the bishops say it is so narrow that it fails to cover the vast majority of faith-based organizations, including Catholic hospitals, universities and service organizations that help millions every year. “Ironically,” they say, “not even Jesus & his disciples would have qualified.”

The bishops go on, “Now that the Administration has refused to recognize the Constitutional conscience rights of organizations and individuals who oppose the mandate, the bishops are now urging Catholics and others of good will to fight this unprecedented attack on conscience rights and religious liberty.”

Interestingly, The Washington Post, as Father Swink indicated, agrees with the bishops. The paper said, “In this circumstance, requiring a religiously affiliated employer to spend its own money in a way that violates its religious principles does not make an adequate accommodation for those deeply held views. Having recognized the principle of a religious exemption, the administration should have expanded it.”

So why would the administration pick a major fight with the Catholic Church? There are two main reasons.

(1) The administration wants to please its progressive and feminist, secular pro-abortion base.

(2) The administration believes Catholics are divided on the issue and will ignore their leaders and follow Obama.

Support for the latter explanation comes in the form of the Obama Administration’s efforts to co-opt the Catholic Church, primarily through appointing nominal Catholics to high-level positions in government and keeping funding going to the church for “social justice” causes. Another player in this effort is the hedge-fund billionaire George Soros, an atheist who nevertheless has found groups that are “Catholic in name only” to accept his financial largesse. These groups, including Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, are designed to give the impression that Catholics are less concerned about issues like stopping abortion and protecting the sanctity of traditional marriage than passing government health care. The Obama/Soros gamble may be backfiring.

It’s true that the bishops went along with Obama’s health care scheme, even lobbying on its behalf. But now they seem to be realizing that the plan was a Trojan Horse designed to force population control measures on the people of the United States . It will be difficult for the bishops to continue working with the administration on other issues, like immigration. They have drawn a line in the sand. They cannot back down.

Father Larry Swink of Jesus The Divine Word Catholic Church in Huntingtown , Maryland , is not alone in his tough language. Pittsburgh Bishop David A. Zubik posted a letter on the Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh’s website that said, “It is really hard to believe that it happened. It comes like a slap in the face. The Obama administration has just told the Catholics of the United States , ‘To Hell with you!’ There is no other way to put it.” He added, “This whole process of mandating these guidelines undermines the democratic process itself. In this instance, the mandate declares pregnancy a disease, forces a culture of contraception and abortion on society, all while completely bypassing the legislative process.”

You know it’s serious when the bishops are talking about heaven and hell.

Indeed, Fr. Swink opened his discussion of what he described as the evil nature of the Obama Administration by reading from scripture about Jesus casting out demons. He saw the order on health care coverage as the start of religious persecution. The congregation joined him in calls of “Amen” when he challenged them to stand tall with the church.

You cannot expect the secular Washington Post to go along with such rhetoric. But even its liberal editorial writer saw the ramifications of the health care order, perhaps anticipating the confrontation that we now see developing. From the point of view of this liberal paper, the Obama Administration is not only undermining religious freedom but risking a major backlash to its overall “progressive” agenda and even a second term in office.

Some may see this battle as just another church-state dust-up that will be resolved through litigation. But when apocalyptic imagery is used, such as what I heard at my church on Sunday, one must wonder if there is an awakening on the part of the Catholic community and if there is something else going on here besides politics as usual. In short, is the Catholic Church beginning to finally recognize the real nature of the Obama Administration?

KUHNER: Obama threatens religious liberty

Mandating contraception coverage violates the Christian conscience

By Jeffrey T. Kuhner

Like many leftists, President Obama has deep contempt for Christianity and democracy. This is why his administration has declared war on the Catholic Church and religious liberty.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius recently went ahead and approved last year’s decision to mandate that many religious organizations provide health insurance plans to their employees that include contraception, abortion-inducing drugs and sterilization coverage – and this must be done without charging a co-pay. In other words, Mr. Obama has done something that is ominous and unprecedented: compelling religious groups to embrace and subsidize free birth control. Catholic universities, hospitals and charities must either betray their fundamental social teachings or drop insurance coverage for their employees, thereby triggering massive financial penalties under Obamacare. The choice is simple: Abandon Catholic doctrine or go out of business.

The ruling will not simply devastate the Catholic heath care system and elaborate social network, which includes soup kitchens, adoption centers, immigrant services and parochial schools. It directly assaults and violates the conscience rights of Catholics. The church teaches that contraception is a sin, an immoral attempt to obstruct God’s will of when and whether human life should be created. It is the ultimate embodiment of pride: man trying to act as God. That is why opposition to birth control is at the heart of the Catholic faith.

The church teaches that the primary purpose of sexual activity within the sacred bonds of marriage is procreation – to perpetuate humanity from one generation to the next. For nearly 1,500 years, such thinking underpinned the Christian West. That was then; this is now. Since the 1960s, modern society is obsessed with contraception, abortion and sexual hedonism. The results have been declining birth rates and shrinking native populations. Literally, the West is dying. As the late Pope John Paul II put it, we are in the grips of “a culture of death.” Birth control is a key pillar. It is a seminal aspect of the socialist drive to establish a secular utopia – smash the traditional family by relentlessly advancing the sexual revolution. The pill and the condom are the hammer and sickle of cultural Marxism. Decades ago, the Vatican warned that birth control eventually would lead to the West’s demise. A civilization unable – and unwilling – to reproduce itself is doomed.

Yet even if one does not care a scintilla about the church’s stance on contraception, the ruling should frighten everybody – Christian and non-Christian. America was founded upon one key principle: religious freedom. The Pilgrims fled religious persecution. Our Founding Fathers deliberately created a republic banning an established church, such as England’s Anglican Church, and championed a nation where different religious denominations could exist – and flourish – without government harassment. Religious liberty lies at the core of American freedom. In fact, the Founders considered it so important that it comes before all other rights enshrined in the First Amendment. James Madison, the primary author of the Constitution, said, “Conscience is the most sacred of all property.” The Obama administration is telling Catholics that their conscience rights can be trampled with impunity. The state has the power to coerce people to support and pay for practices they find morally repugnant and contravene their fundamental religious beliefs. This is tyranny.

I know I seem to be rather fixated on Germany and the inter-war years today, but as each day passes the striking similarities between then and what is now happening in this country are becoming much too real to ignore.

This is exactly the same way it started for the German and ultimately occupied European Jews during that period, as by the time the ovens got cranked up in earnest, the people living in nearby towns had become so acclimated to the persecution of the Jews they had become completely numb to it, even though there is no way they were unaware of what was happening in those nearby camps – and these were civilized people.

And let us not forget that it was not just Jews that were rounded up and packed off to the Hitlerite hotels, six million of which ultimately perished, but three million Christians died right along side them.

This is no time for Christians in America to “turn the other cheek,” because as history has repeatedly demonstrated, this sort of persecution will only get worse if it is not effectively resisted early and often. The time to nip this nonsense in the bud is now.

All freedom-loving Americans need to stand up and speak out, because it is not just Christians this rogue government is looking to intimidate and harass, but just about anyone who runs afoul of the whims of this increasingly tyrannical and out-of-control administration.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.

-Pastor Martin Niemöller

-And Pastor Niemöller would know, as he spent seven years in NAZI concentration camps.

-Dave

A group of Amish men were sent to jail in western Kentucky Thursday for refusing to pay fines for breaking a state highway law that requires their horse-drawn buggies to be marked with orange reflective triangles.

The men have a religious objection to the bright orange signs, which they say are flashy and conflict with their pledge to live low-key and religious lives.

Ananias Byler, the first of 10 Amish men due in Graves County District Court on Thursday, was sentenced to 10 days in jail. The men were jailed for being found in contempt of court for refusing to pay the fines. Byler told Judge Deborah Crooks Thursday that he would not pay the $489 he owes.

I totally understand your objection,” the judge told Byler. “But you’re in violation, and it’s not up to me to change the law. It doesn’t really matter what I think about any of this.”

Photos: Inside Amish Life

The men belong to a conservative breakaway group of Amish known as Swartzentruber. They live simply, with no electricity, plumbing or appliances. But in recent years they have been running afoul of the law for refusing to use the triangles on their buggies, and some were sent to jail last year.

9 Amish men get jail in Ky. safety triangle case

The Amish men, wearing long dark coats on a snowy day in Mayfield, removed their black wide-brimmed hats before entering the courtroom. They sat quietly until their names were called.

Amish plead not guilty in beard-cutting attacks

Amish boy left horse at Walmart, now what?

Sheriff: Ohio man cleaning gun killed Amish girl

Jacob Gingerich said he and the other men will continue to refuse to pay the fines. Gingerich owed the most, $627, and was sentenced to 13 days in jail Thursday.

“We’re just not going to pay,” Gingerich, a farmer with 12 children, said before the court appearance.

Police and prosecutors say the orange triangles help motorists see the buggies and avoid collisions.

“You get behind one of the buggies at night, you can’t see it,” Graves County Sheriff DeWayne Redmon said. “We’re citing them for their own safety as well as the safety of others.”

Gingerich and two other Amish men, with help from the Kentucky chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, have sued over the state highway law, saying it infringes on their religious freedom. The Kentucky Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case later this year after the state appeals court rejected the Amish men’s argument in June.

Gingerich said Thursday that he wished the judge would have waited for the state Supreme Court to hear the case before throwing the men in jail.

Kentucky lawmakers are considering changes to the highway law to allow the Amish to use gray reflective tape instead of the orange triangles.

Of Kentucky’s 120 counties, Graves County has recorded the most violations for failure to use the orange triangles in the last five years, according to data obtained by The Associated Press. The county has recorded 57 of a total of 89 violations statewide since 2007.