Freedom in the Crosshairs: Why Religious Liberty Must Prevail
In their masterful crafting of the First Amendment to the Constitution and its free exercise of religion clause, the Founders ensured that our faith could inform our politics but our government could never influence our faith.
Yet in recent weeks, our president felt compelled to give a powerful address on the sanctity of religious freedom in America and around the globe and a presidential candidate called for the repeal of tax exemption status for churches that disagree with his policy preferences.
A war on religious liberty is being aggressively waged against Americans of all faiths by coercive secular progressives tying their future political power to stripping citizens of their first constitutional right. As President Trump noted in his September address at the United Nations , “No right is more fundamental … than the right to follow one’s religious convictions. Too often, people in positions of power preach diversity while silencing, shunning, or censoring the faithful.”
The destruction of religious freedom creates an environment for the erosion of other freedoms. The case against the anti-faith agenda has three underlying constructs—inherent contradictions in its position, the value of faith communities to society, and the Constitution itself.
The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” It put the right to worship (or not worship) before freedoms of speech, press, assembly and petition.
Secularists demand “separations of church and state,” a clause that appears nowhere in U.S. law, but in an 1802 letter Thomas Jefferson wrote emphasizing that faith resides between a person and God with no interference from the state. Perhaps if Jefferson wrote “protecting the church from the state” progressives would be marginally less eager to manipulate its meaning for their self-serving ends.
Neither those elected to run the government nor the activist class have any right or authority to impose their religious or non-religious will on others. This is the inarguable meaning and application of the clause.
The ridiculous hypocrisy of the left’s version of “separating” church from state is stark. Removing charitable tax exemption from churches that don’t meet the same-sex marriage policy demands of candidate O’Rourke and other progressives is the opposite of separating church and state. It would instead combine them. Taxing churches ties them to Congress, the judiciary, IRS and U.S. Treasury, making people of faith subject to the whims of political parties, activists and revenue collection agencies.
And what next? Vegans taxing churches that serve beef in soup kitchens? Climate change activists insisting on removing charity status from synagogues without solar panels?
The personal beliefs of individuals, based on their religious texts and doctrines, determine the positions of churches. A church that favors traditional marriage can be directly across the street from one that embraces same-sex marriage. No one forces anyone to attend or not attend either; at least not yet.
Progressives and Mr. O’Rourke should seriously consider the harm they would do to people in need by denying churches tax exemption. Houses of Worship serve critical roles in meeting community and individual needs that government does not. Churches have always been designated charities by our government because they are charities.
A short list of services regularly provided include meals for the poor and homeless, shelter, clothing, utility payments, mental health counseling, disability and prison ministry, and ESL classes. The value of social services provided by churches is estimated in the billions. That does not include decreasing societal and financial welfare costs when lives are transformed by faith and people turn away from crime, substance abuse or suicide. With no exemption, funding is automatically decreased by 30 percent.
Donations to churches for assistance programs come directly from congregants who have already been taxed at least once by the federal government. Their giving comes from what is left over after government takes its bite out of their income and they should not be subject to double or triple taxation.
Every April, people rely on charitable tax deductions. Making churches non-tax exempt would result in less giving, depriving important church programs of operational funds. Secular bullies seem willing to sacrifice the welfare of people in need to punish religious institutions for exercising their Constitutional right to make religious decisions.
In Pew Research Center’s October 2019 report on American religious affiliation, 74 percent identified with a faith system; only four percent as atheist. The Constitution does not allow any special interest group to use the state to abrogate freedoms they don’t like, and nothing in our representative democracy gives a tyrannical minority permission to stick its nose into other people’s freedoms.
Anyone who values any of their individual rights must understand an attack on one is an attack on all. Take a stand: embrace the Constitution, celebrate freedom, practice tolerance, love your neighbor.
Kerri Toloczko is a Senior Fellow with The American Civil Rights Union, a non-partisan, non-profit public policy organization dedicated to protecting the constitutionally-protected civil rights of all Americans.
Recommended from Townhall
Tags
Who is online
107 visitors
Progressives and Mr. O’Rourke should seriously consider the harm they would do to people in need by denying churches tax exemption. Houses of Worship serve critical roles in meeting community and individual needs that government does not. Churches have always been designated charities by our government because they are charities.
A short list of services regularly provided include meals for the poor and homeless, shelter, clothing, utility payments, mental health counseling, disability and prison ministry, and ESL classes. The value of social services provided by churches is estimated in the billions. That does not include decreasing societal and financial welfare costs when lives are transformed by faith and people turn away from crime, substance abuse or suicide. With no exemption, funding is automatically decreased by 30 percent.
Donations to churches for assistance programs come directly from congregants who have already been taxed at least once by the federal government. Their giving comes from what is left over after government takes its bite out of their income and they should not be subject to double or triple taxation.
Every April, people rely on charitable tax deductions. Making churches non-tax exempt would result in less giving, depriving important church programs of operational funds. Secular bullies seem willing to sacrifice the welfare of people in need to punish religious institutions for exercising their Constitutional right to make religious decisions.
That's great. As long as they don't get political, then there's no problem.
"If churches want to play the game of politics, let them pay admission like everyone else." ---George Carlin
exactly. get a clue bible thumpers.
74 percent identified with a faith system; only four percent as atheist. The Constitution does not allow any special interest group to use the state to abrogate freedoms they don’t like, and nothing in our representative democracy gives a tyrannical minority permission to stick its nose into other people’s freedoms.
Anyone who values any of their individual rights must understand an attack on one is an attack on all.
The Supreme Court disagrees:
Supreme Court rejects case of Christian teen forced to write Islamic conversion prayer
Yes, there should always and forever be separation of church and state, don't like and want a theocracy, move to the middle east
"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death." --- George Carlin
I like that one
At some point you thought it all out for yourself and came around to a more progress perspective on reproductive freedom and religious separation. Keep that libersl thinking up and you just might eventually come all the way around to my way of thinking.
The next step is getting you to see that Supply Side "Voodoo" Economics is a fairy tale, also. It is pure bullshit! Economics is just math. We could balance our budget and provide for the health, welfare and security of all Americans if we just had the political will to do so. Voodoo Trickle Down Supply Side Craponomics will never ever really work. All it does is bankrupt the government and saddle us all with mountains of superfluous worthless paper debt. We cannot balance our government's books while starving our government's coffers at the same damn time.
If government was just off the books as far as working people's payroll go so working people did not falsely believe they were personally being raped financially for basic government services we could do anything. It the Egyptian could building the Pyramids 5,000 years ago and if Americans built the Hoover Dam in the middle of The Great Depression why are we doing bupkiss?
Just think about it. When we finall quit basing public and tax policy decisions on stone age myths and superstitious fairy tales our whole world will expand!
Though the evidence is mounting that the strategy is ineffective and unpopular, the Democratic Party seems generally committed to making it clear that people of faith are not welcome in their vision of America.
Several items in recent years are worth recalling.
First, in 2012, the party removed the word “God” from its platform.
The Obama administration spent years controversially embroiled in ham-handed attempts to force religious groups to conform to the party’s secular agenda on birth control and abortion, losing court case after court case on religious freedom grounds.
In the 2016 general election, WikiLeaks revealed the glib manner in which John Podesta and others in the Clinton campaign sought to reshape the Catholic Church for their political purposes, which shocked many voters. They hoped to move Catholic teaching away from its longstanding doctrine to provide an advantage for the Democrats politically.
It seems that things haven’t changed much. Two presidential candidates expected to be in the top tier have recently and outspokenly attacked people of faith – and neither has gained the traction expected.
Sen. Kamala Harris should have been a contender for the Democratic nomination, but she has consistently polled in the single digits. Just prior to her candidacy, Harris suffered a self-inflicted wound. Her ill-fated attack on a judicial nominee for his membership in the Knights of Columbus, a mainstream Catholic charitable group, created a national firestorm that has undermined her candidacy.
Beto O’Rourke, who came within an eyelash of defeating Ted Cruz for a Senate seat in deep-red Texas, has also failed to get any traction. His desire to eliminate tax exemptions for church groups that don’t toe the party line on social issues shows a totalitarian impulse that will not help his candidacy or the Democratic Party more broadly.
A candidate expected to be in the second or third tier, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, is the one candidate in the entire Democratic primary who has pushed back against her party’s blind hostility to people of faith and its complete embrace of the abortion-up-until-birth lobby. As a result, she – not the candidate who honeymooned in the Soviet Union – has fallen victim to the specter of Saul Alinsky’s pen pal Hillary Clinton calling her a “Russian agent.”
Though poll after poll shows that neither abortion up until birth nor assaults on American’s First Amendment religious freedom rights are popular, the Democrats seem unwilling to learn.
Now these bad ideas have taken on a local flavor.
In California earlier this year, Democrats at the state level tried to pass legislation to force priests to break the seal of confession – something utterly sacrosanct to Catholics and Orthodox Christians. Not surprisingly, a backlash from these groups and those of many other faiths ensued.
Similar legislation is now being proposed in Wisconsin. All three sponsors of the bill are all Democrats.
It’s not just the sacrament of confession that is being targeted either.
In Colorado, a Democrat-controlled bicameral taxation committee is looking into legislation that would subject churches to a “sin tax” on altar wine – something that would affect Catholics and others. They are also looking into placing a premium tax on fraternal insurance companies – mainly religiously affiliated groups like the Baptist Life Association, the Knights of Columbus (Catholic), the Thrivent (Christian, predominately Lutheran)
Leading the committee is Rep. Adrienne Benavidez – who in 2017 voted against a bill guaranteeing religious freedom rights for Coloradans.
One wonders how far the Democrats can go on with this war on faith. How long until the black churches, mosques, synagogues and Hispanic parishes upon which the party depends say “enough.”
The 2016 election showed the perils of the Democrats’ approach, but so far, at least, the lesson has not been learned.
A war on religious liberty is being aggressively waged against Americans of all faiths by coercive secular progressives tying their future political power to stripping citizens of their first constitutional right. As President Trump noted in his September address at the United Nations , “No right is more fundamental … than the right to follow one’s religious convictions. Too often, people in positions of power preach diversity while silencing, shunning, or censoring the faithful.”
The destruction of religious freedom creates an environment for the erosion of other freedoms. The case against the anti-faith agenda has three underlying constructs—inherent contradictions in its position, the value of faith communities to society, and the Constitution itself.
The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” It put the right to worship (or not worship) before freedoms of speech, press, assembly and petition.
[Removed]
A war on religious liberty is being aggressively waged against Americans of all faiths by coercive secular progressives tying their future political power to stripping citizens of their first constitutional right. As President Trump noted in his September address at the United Nations , “No right is more fundamental … than the right to follow one’s religious convictions. Too often, people in positions of power preach diversity while silencing, shunning, or censoring the faithful.”
The destruction of religious freedom creates an environment for the erosion of other freedoms.
Faux war
...We hope that the Justice Department stands its ground. The attorney general’s remarks at Notre Dame are one of the most important statements of support that religious Americans have had at a time when a campaign is underway to cast religion as a cover for bigotry. We are in a time when the left seeks to intimidate those who would cast religion as an inherently good thing for America.
The complaint against Mr. Barr, from a group called Faithful America, faults him for quoting John Adams. It was the second president who said: “We have no government armed with the power which is capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”
The point Messrs. Adams and Barr were making is not that atheists be excluded from society. It is rather that without religion, not even our Constitution could keep human passions under control. Were religion banned or circumscribed, the result would be anarchy. “This Adams quotation,” says the complaint filed against Mr. Barr “is a personal opinion rather than binding Constitutional interpretation.”
Even were that true, what of it? The fact is that the opinion shared by Mr. Barr and John Adams was shared by nearly all of the Founding Fathers, including most pointedly George Washington. He made the point in his Farewell Address. “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity,” Washington said, “religion and morality are indispensable supports.”
No man could “claim the tribute of patriotism,” Washington averred, if he sought to “subvert” religion and morality. “The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.” He suggested that neither our property, reputations, or lives would be secure were “the sense of religious obligation” to “desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice.”
Then the famous words: “Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”
The words are prophetic, which we know from the last century, when the rise of Soviet Union and the other communist states, where religion was excluded as a matter of socialist law, emerged as what President Reagan called an “evil empire” that snuffed out the liberty of believers and non-believers alike.
The communist states turned against all religious persons — Jews and Moslems and others as well as Christians. That history is out there to mock any claim that Mr. Barr is seeking but to promote the establishment of Christianity. The First Amendment prohibits Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion. It was worded that way to protect against disestablishment, too.
Attorney General Barr is hardly the first in our time to have made the points he made at Notre Dame. Few, though, have put the issue as eloquently as Mr. Barr did. He put the Justice Department precisely where the results of the 2016 presidential campaign signaled America wants it to be....
Blah, blah, blah. barr is a hack
The New York Sun article got it exactly right. As for Barr, he’s a great American and an awesome advocate for both religious liberty and law and order.
Nope, Barr is another faux christian hack
And who died and made you a god who could sit in judgement over whether one is a real Christian and how their/our beliefs political or religious make us “hacks”? Just who do you think you are to do that?
Merry Christmas! 🎁🎄
Happy Halloween
Happy Thanksgiving
Merry Christmas
Happy New Year
Happy Easter
Funny coming from you who judges others because they are different than you, worship a different God from you, or worship no God at all. Some, like me, choose to keep our religious beliefs to ourselves and not throw it out their for political reasons.
Did you think you were going to offend me by wishing me a Merry Christmas, once again you don't know me personally yet you tried to judge me
Ask yourself the same question.
I never sit in judgement over matters that belong to God to decide. My religious beliefs and worship is totally separate from politics. I never speak for anyone but myself when it comes to political beliefs I have. My political beliefs on social issues are comparable to generic evangelical Protestant stated beliefs as well as social conservatives on most but not all issues. There are people of all political persuasions in church and thus why politics are not discussed from the pulpit unless it directly affects a doctrinal belief. The church is about spreading the good news to the whole world so that the end may come soon, not to create a political so called Heaven on earth. That detracts from the real soul saving mission. That I as a social conservative on some issues for secular political reasons or generic religious liberty matters doesn’t mean that I speak for my church on those matters.
Nope. I was simple bringing up another very real secular progressive war that your side often denies reality and wrongly calls it faux.
Yes, you were being judgmental and out to offend, without knowing that yes, I say Merry Christmas.
Arguably the best time of year. October is possibly the best month of the year too.
Halloween is a satanic holiday in my opinion.
Your opinion (such as it is) is noted, ignorantly erroneous, and ignored.
Halloween should be declared a national holiday. Regardless, it is one of the more fun ones.
Halloween and its roots in witchcraft and Druidic paganism are undeniable. When we examine the history of Halloween, one thing we find out very quickly is that it is based on the ancient pagan religion of the Celtics in Northern Ireland and their celebration of the festival of the dead, known as Samhain. In Northern Ireland, a class of ruthless priests known as the Druids ruled Northern Ireland through occult terror and human sacrifice for centuries.
According to Ronald Hutton in The Stations of the Sun: A History of the Ritual Year in Britain, ‘Samhain’ referred to Celtic Halloween customs all the way up until the 19th century (Hutton, Ronald, The Stations of the Sun: A History of the Ritual Year in Britain, New York: Oxford University Press, 1996, p. 369)
Today, Ireland celebrates Halloween with fireworks displays and is the only nation on earth that recognizes Halloween as a national holiday. Children in Ireland are given a week off from school for its observance.
Druid Festival of the Dead
The Celts celebrated the day of death in anticipation of the dark, cold winter months. The eve of Samhain marked the special time of the year when the Druids taught that demons, souls and gods were unleashed on the world to bring blessing or wreak havoc and destruction on unsuspecting souls.
The Encyclopedia Britannica states:
“In ancient Britain and Ireland, the Celtic festival of Samhain was observed on October 31 at the end of the summer … The souls of the dead were supposed to revisit their homes on this day and the autumnal festival acquired sinister significance, with ghosts, witches, goblins, black cats, fairies and demons of all kinds said to be roaming about. It was the time to placate the supernatural powers controlling the processes of nature. In addition, Halloween was thought to be the most favorable time for divinations concerning marriage, luck, health, and death. It was the only day on which the help of the devil was invoked for such purposes.” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2005, "Halloween")
Today, Halloween is a truly occult holiday for many Celtic Neo-Pagans, Wiccan witches and Satanists alike. Many who are involved in the dark arts and traffic in spiritism, view Halloween as a religious holiday and are acutely aware that it is rooted in the occult. (Hutton, Ronald, The Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles: Their Nature and Legacy, Oxford: Blackwell, 1991, pp. 327–341)
Doreen Valiente
Valiente helped formulate modern Wicca (known as Gardnerian Wicca) after it was first created by Satanist Gerald Gardner, who was also a disciple of Satanist Aleister Crowley and a member of Crowley’s satanic organization known as the O.T.O. Unknown to most Wiccan’s, Gardner subsumed many of Crowley’s satanic teachings on ceremonial "magick" into Wicca and used a variation of Crowley’s satanic maxim “Do What Thou Wilt” for the wiccan Rede (e.g., That it harm none, do as thou wilt)
Wiccan high priestess, Valiente, said of Halloween:
“Halloween is one of the four Great Sabbats of the witches that everyone has heard about. To witches, Halloween is a serious occasion, however merrily celebrated. It is the old Celtic Eve of Samhain.”
Sharon Graham, who fancies herself as a high priestess of Salem witches, and who was charged in a feud with other witches for intimidating a witness by allegedly placing a raccoon’s head on the doorsteps of Angelica of the Angels and the Goddess’ Treasure Chest, said of Halloween:
"Salem (Massachusetts) is a mecca, especially around Samhain. It is our holiday, our new year, and a lot of witches come here from all over the world." (Source)
Halloween is considered a satanic holiday for many confessing Satanists, and for obvious reasons, as it is a day where demons, witches and devils are glorified. The first Greater Church of Lucifer in Houston, Texas chose Halloween as the perfect day to officially open its doors to the public. (Source).
Anton LaVey
“After one’s own birthday, the two major Satanic holidays are Walpurgisnacht (May 1st) and Halloween.” (LaVey, Anton Szandor, The Satanic Bible, 1969, p. 96)
The official website for the Church of Satan states on their FAQ page that Halloween is a time when the masses “reach down inside and touch the ‘darkness’ which for [us] Satanists is a daily mode of existence,” as they may freely “indulge their fantasies by donning costumes that allow for intense role-playing and the release of their demonic core.” (Source)
GET OUR HALLOWEEN TRACTS >>
Halloween is steadily gaining ground on Christmas as America’s favorite Holiday. In 2014, the National Retail Federation’s annual consumer spending survey revealed that Americans spent a whopping $7.4 billion to celebrate Halloween. $2.8 billion was for costumes ($1.1 billion for children’s costumes and $1.4 billion for adults). Another $2 billion was spent on demonic decorations and the rest on candy.
While many still choose to rejoice and celebrate our Lord Jesus’ birth on Christmas as the incarnation of God in human flesh (John 1:1-3, 14), for many Christmas has become nothing more than a materialistic endeavor.
It makes perfect sense that Christmas would fall by the wayside and Halloween would grow in prominence, as the scriptures warn that many would turn from Christ in the last days and that an occult revival would ensue as a harbinger for the coming Antichrist and new world order (Matthew 24:9-10, 24-25; 2 Timothy 3:1-8; 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12; Revelation 13:1-18).
The Scriptures tell us:
“For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8b).
“He has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Colossians 1:13-14).
When we came to Christ we were delivered “from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God”(Acts 26:18), should we then return to Satan’s kingdom and celebrate after having been set free?
As Christians we are warned no to participate in the celebration of evil but the rather expose them:
“Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them” (Ephesians 5:11).
Rather than dressing up like demons, witches and devils, we are to “abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thessalonians 5:22)
We are told in 3 John 1:11 “Beloved, do not imitate what is evil but what is good.”
Though I personally have some Irish heritage, I know better than imitating Druidic paganism:
“Thus says the Lord, “Do not learn the way of the nations…”
As Christians we ought to be repulsed by a holiday that celebrates the very things that our God and Maker calls abominations. Deuteronomy 18:9-14 is the biblical passage that most directly addresses the customs of Halloween. Note how the Lord warns that He expelled those who had inhabited the Promised Land for engaging in such practices and He warned His people that he would do the same to them should they imitate their practices:
“When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, you shall not learn to imitate the detestable things of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For whoever does these things is detestable to the LORD; and because of these detestable things the LORD your God will drive them out before you. You shall be blameless before the LORD your God. For those nations, which you shall dispossess, listen to those who practice witchcraft and to diviners, but as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do so” (Deuteronomy 18:9-14).
We see here one of the most inclusive lists of activities upon which Halloween was established that can be found anywhere in the bible, and the practitioners thereof are labeled “detestable.” Those habits are, in fact, the very reason the Pagan nations were driven out of the Promised Land.
We would encourage you to prayerfully consider celebrating Jesus and His glorious kingdom of light on Halloween, rather than the kingdom of darkness. At Blessed Hope Chapel, where I serve as Pastor, we celebrate the Lord and His winning of souls in a Harvest Festival on October 31st each year. It is a great time for both children and adults alike and keeps our focus on Jesus rather than the kingdom of darkness. Many of us also pass out tracts. While others are celebrating darkness and death we celebrate the Prince of Life and share tracts with those who come to our doors looking for a treat. May the Lord lead you and protect you from the evil one as you seek His face!
Did you go trick-or-treating as a kid ? Carve a pumpkin ?
“When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, you shall not learn to imitate the detestable things of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For whoever does these things is detestable to the LORD; and because of these detestable things the LORD your God will drive them out before you. You shall be blameless before the LORD your God. For those nations, which you shall dispossess, listen to those who practice witchcraft and to diviners, but as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do so” (Deuteronomy 18:9-14 ).
We see here one of the most inclusive lists of activities upon which Halloween was established that can be found anywhere in the bible, and the practitioners thereof are labeled “detestable.” Those habits are, in fact, the very reason the Pagan nations were driven out of the Promised Land.
It is interesting to note that satanists and socialists consider May 1st to be their big day. Coincidence?
What day is that? And what's the relevance.
Bizarre conspiracy theory. May 1 st is International Worker's Day and May 1 st is also, coincidentally, Walpurgis Night .
HA apparently is aware that a calendar day has two events associated with it and suggests that this means that socialism and satanism are related.
Good grief.
Tell me about it. That's what you get when religion is adhered to more than actual facts.
Sounds like a Charlie Brown X mas
murdering of Holidaze for Boo's and Ghouls dressed in Satanic Satan Sheetz,
scaring the hell out of H A, ha ha, laughing all the way to the details of Hallows Eve
Asz that is where
The DEVIL is.
B leave she goes by the cleverly coded name of Luci Furlough, as how low can LucyFur
lough go,
as she again yanks Chucks' balls out from under him,
a habit Chuck can't quit,or kick, as he's obviously addicted to the De Tails hanging off the rear of
Loose fir strips for Charles in charge of Angels who have obtuse Angles of her poll position he prefers to lap dance around till some got Snoopy, and called Lew de officer , know gentlemen pleased to meet you,
hope you guess my name
that i named Again, yet he doesn't respond
when i call him Again,
so i call him in the details, as that's where the Devil always is.
The only part of any of your posts so far that is believable.
Your links don't work, but I'll bet they're from religiously biased BS sites, which is where most of your citations come from. So here's a brief, factual history regarding Halloween.
Halloween traces its origins to the Celtic festival of Samhain, which goes back more than 2000 years and pre-dates Christianity. So right off the bat, it precludes the possibility of Satanic basis or origin. Basically, it was an annual communal meeting at the end of the harvest year and when people believed the line between the physical world and spirit world weakened or broke down, and the spirits of the dead would come into the physical world (sounds similar to certain religious concepts, including christianity).
People would disguise themselves to fend off or scare the dead away (seem familiar?) But the ancient Celts had no concept of anything regarding the Christian devil or Satan. During the Middle ages, people would go to the homes of the rich or affluent and offer prayers for the dead in exchange for food. Children would do the same, offering jokes or games for food or coins (sound familiar?)
Trick or treating itself didn't start in the US until the wave of immigrants in the early 20th century came and brought that tradition with them, which caught on and gained popularity after WWII, until it became the current Halloween trick-or-treating custom. But it was Christianity that usurped the Celtic festival and attempted to put their own spin on it.
If you're going to try to make some kind of point, it's better to use actual, factual historical sources rather than what a religion (which hates such observances and deems them "Satanic" for no good reason) says. You might look more credible and less ignorant then!
I also noticed you never answered Pat's question. Why is that?
They are. People’s republic of China and soviet Russia and others like them are proof of it.
Halloween is a religious holiday for the forces of evil.
You found a typo. Congrats
Why make such ridiculous claims? Most everyone knows that the People's Republic of China, the former USSR, etc. are not nations that advocated the worship of Satan. And both of them have a horrible record (arguably the worst in recent history) for how they treated the average working person.
Why type such a foolish comment?
Just guessing, but I would say in order to keep his seed on the front page
Correction I found an amusing typo, it's a subtle difference but still a difference.
Yup, my assumption too. No shame?
You calling religious beliefs foolish doesn’t make it so nor will it silence us.
I was referring to socialism and state atheism both evil.
You know what is said about people who assume?
A complete misrepresentation of what I wrote.
You wrote this:
I replied with this:
Socialism is not the same as labor solidarity (per International Worker's Day) and 'state atheism' is not even remotely the same as satanism (per Walpurgis Night) .
Did you not know that?
More ignorant nonsense I see. It's clear you never bothered to actually research Halloween. At least, not without religious bias and blinders. How Typical.
Do tell! I'm curious, especially since assuming is what you do! Or make sweeping generalizations.
They already are foolish. Much like your assertions about Halloween.
No one is trying to.
I did. I simply said it’s no coincidence that socialists and satanists share the same day to hold most high.
Many Christians do believe that Halloween is a celebration of things God abhors. Nothing foolish about that reality.
Not true.
You equate socialists with labor solidarity and satanism with state atheism. That is a profound misunderstanding of the terms.
Christianity (the class of religions) does not hold Halloween to be satanic. Your comment was foolish. Your equivocation is a step in the right direction but intellectual honesty would be much better.
Yes true!
That's not foolish. That's just absurd! Not to mention just plain stupid!
Since I’m not going to ignore you and there’s a limit on impasses per thread, I’m simply collapsing the thread. Saying that Christian belief is absurd and stupid because you disagree is the height of bigotry and intolerance.
It's religious belief in general that's absurd. It's based on emotion and superstition. Religions make claims, as matter of fact, for which they cannot empirically or objectively support. That's neither bigotry or intolerance. That's simple fact. And if you can't handle that, then that's your problem, not mine!
Bigotry and intolerance is trying to elevate one''s own religion above others, or declare other religions "false" or satanic based or some nonsense like that. But you've never done that, right? >sarc <
People can have all the faith they want, that's not the issue, the issue is what they do with that faith, i.e., try to make laws based on their faith, condemn people that don't believe as they do, discriminate based on their faith....you get the picture.
I don't believe. But that doesn't mean religious claims, especially when posited as fact or truth, shouldn't be challenged, or belief itself called out for what it is. Especially if it promotes misinformation or willful ignorance.
When outlandish bs is posted regarding religion, yes, I will call it out.
Me too Lady. Well said!
For example:
Gee TiG, would calling Halloween "a religious holiday for the forces of evil" be intolerant or bigoted?
"Fundies say the darndest things" - Art Linkletter...
HA's pronouncements are getting farther out there.
They've always been out there.
Factually true is the correct answer.
Let me know when you have something factually true then! Because so far, you've said anything but.
I'm not sure what relevance that has to this discussion. But one cannot disprove something that hasn't even been shown to exist in the first place. Religions certainly have never proven god/s existence to begin with, despite any claims made for a god. When there's some objective, empirical evidence for a god, then it may be "disproven."
Those demanding proof will never get it. People will believe by faith or they won’t believe at all with all the consequences that flow from that choice.
So in life non-acceptance by the delusional and in death no consequences. I can live (lol) with both, thanks.
Because those making outrageous or absurd claims never have an proof. They just continue to make such unsubstantiated claims ando in a intellectually dishonest manner, continue to tour their claims as fact or truth when they have nothing to support it. Facts and evidence has nothing to do with belief.
Proof is almost certainly never going to come but even basic evidence has failed to emerge after thousands of years and no doubt billions of individuals (over time) highly motivated to produce it.
Why do you think it bothers some so much that some believe in God?
Because people like C4P want to force their religion into our laws and our schools, in violation of our Constitution. They want to impose Christian Sharia law in this country.
The majority of people who believe in God aren't assholes, but those who are give religion a bad name.
Oh, the hilarious threats from the evil boogeyman that people like C4P love to throw out there don't help, either. People who worship something that's so evil shouldn't be surprised when moral people push back.
Your god Satan has nothing to do with Halloween.
Please give some details on your claims.
Are you just throwing random words together ?
If you can't figure out what Christian Sharia law is, you're stupid - and I don't think you're stupid.
Read some of the crap that C4P throws out here, from acknowledged Christian Dominionist sites whose avowed purpose is to shove Christian fundamentalism into our laws, government and schools. If Muslims do it, C4P and his ilk start screeching about Sharia law - but if Christian fundies do it, it's somehow OK to these fanatics.
No, to mix Christianity and Sharia law together is stupid.
It's like calling someone a carnivorous broccoli eater.
Well, I didn't invent the term. I personally find it quite descriptive - and it describes accurately what those like C4P want for this country.
The problem is holding as truth that which is unevidenced and, in many cases, that which defies evidence to the contrary. The problem is, in effect, the dissemination of misinformation. As a specific example, the promotion of the idea that evolution is a worldwide conspiracy by godless scientists to discredit creationism.
Personally I have no issue with people who believe there must be a sentient creator. There might be ... it is possible. But when people go beyond that and invent stories and rules which lead others into bad action then, yes, I think that is a problem. I will leave it up to the reader to recognize an obvious, modern day, horrific action based on religious belief.
Kind of sounds more like a personal problem. What does it hurt anyone for others to believe in God?
Maybe you should read more than my opening sentence.
I did.
I responded to the part I considered worthy of responding to.
What a crock. You asked a question that was answered in my original comment (if you had bothered to read it).
Do you have anything of value to offer or is trying to pick a petty fight the best you can muster?
WHO THE FUCK IN THE USA IS HAVING THEIR RELIGIOUS LIBERTY(IES) DENIED, WHO?
This is who.
The exemptions provided to religious organizations ends when they break the law. This is a legal question, not denying freedom of worship. If the church was not handing out cannabis in return for donations they likely would not be in trouble.
As I patiently tried to explain to you in my earlier post, I did read your entire post. If there is anything, anything at all, that is confusing about "I did", let me know and perhaps we can bring in a third party to explain it to you. God knows I already tried all I am going to.
I have no need to explain or justify any of my opinions to you or anyone else.
I didn't claim you didn't answer a question, so why are you insinuating I did?
You did claim he didn't answer a question. You said: "What does it hurt anyone for others to believe in God?" when he had clearly addressed that in his comment.
I find it hard to believe that you still don't know that I am a male, despite being told so numerous times.
I can only surmise that you consider calling me a female as some sort of slur or slight. There can be no other logical explanation. How unusual for a member of a party which claims tolerance and equality!
[deleted]
Again, WHO THE FUCK IN THE USA IS HAVING THEIR RELIGIOUS LIBERTY(IES) DENIED, WHO?
So far you have offered nothing of intellectual value in reply to my comment. If this is all you have then I suggest you move on.
[Deleted]
Yes I know they use laws to trample their religious freedom and some like the American Indians get special treatment.
From the article.
"Initially skeptical, Delyea thinks it’s a good argument. The government has already granted religious exemptions to certain groups for drug use, most notably an allowance for the Native American Church to use peyote. And Wisconsin allows Catholic inmates in Wisconsin institutions to imbibe sacramental wine, he said, and forbidding sacramental cannabis smacks of favoring one religion over another."
'They' use laws? If the laws did not exist then 'they' could not use them. Point is this: when religious acts run up against the law there will issues. The issues may be resolved by granting exceptions or by denying the 'religious' actions that violate the law. Stay within the law and religious freedom is clear and present.
To give a stark example, honor killing is a religious practice in some sects of Islam. Clearly if that is attempted in the USA then those 'they' people you mention will prevent this practice as a violation of our law. Do you see that as 'they' using laws to trample religious freedom?
I suggest if you don't like what I write, ignore me!
Yes I can see how killing someone would be violating the rights of others and how these Rastas are not and their freedom is being restricted for no good reason.
In both cases there is a violation of existing law. The Rastafarians are breaking existing law. They are free to practice their religion within the law. When they violate the law there is a situation that is dealt with by granting them an exception to the law or changing the law itself or by them changing their practices to conform to the law.
You do not get to declare a violation of religious freedom on religious acts that violate existing law. That is not the meaning of religious freedom.
Short answer: NOBODY!
Awesome.
Its not the belief that bothers anyone. It's the disingenuous and intellectually dishonest claims based on that belief and when passed off as fact or truth that's the problem.
I'll believe as I wish and leave others to do the same.
Like I said, you can believe whatever you want and no one cares. But if you or someone else tries to pass their beliefs off as fact and/or truth, as we have clearly seen certain individuals do, then don't be surprised when those beliefs the claims based on them are challenged or called out.
That works both ways, you know.
Not in "Gordy" land !
Their supposed "Logic" is a one-way-street.
Mirror, Mirror on the wall....your statement fits You too....after all !
Reference your own comment.
I've made no mention of my beliefs. So what are you specifically referring to?
See my post 3.2.109.
For one....what is "my be".
second:
read comment ..... 3.2.101 Gordy327 (it's like YOU know EVERYTHING) !
If that's what you're taking away from this, then logic clearly eludes you.
First, it was a glitch in the reply, which I corrected.
Second, my short answer is correct.
Unfortunately, you apparently don't know the difference between a fact and a belief.
That would explain the lack of logic in your comments.
I saw it.
And?
Even "Spock" is wrong at times.
"The Galileo Seven"
Apparently YOU don't !
If a "Belief" can't be Proven one way or another, is there actually a "Fact" to argue about ?
that's exactly right and only Dean has come up with one bogus example.
Do you have a "Citation" to show that comment as a fact ?
Only since you had time to relook at what you posted, after I asked the question.
"Second, my short answer is correct."
As YOU say to others ….. PROVE it ….. Logically !
It might be Pon farr season, but give it your best shot anyway.
No, I said it was a glitch in posting. What do you not understand about that.
Second, there is no legitimate reports or cases of anyone's religious liberties or freedoms being denied. Everyone is still free to believe whatever they want.
Except it's not and that has been explained to you as to why. So continuing to make your erroneous claim as fact is dishonest and as good as lying at this point.
On your part ….. right (The Galileo Seven) ?
It showed up as a final on my end.
"Second, there is no legitimate reports or cases of anyone's religious liberties or freedoms being denied."
What do you concider "Legitimate" anyway ?
That's the best you can come up with, even though a TV show has zero relevance? You're just wasting your time and looking foolish now. Best to quit before you embarrass yourself further.
And my statement stands. If you're not getting it, that's your problem.
Just following your line of "Logical" thinking.
Oh, I got it. And if you don't understand that, then that is your personal problem.
Your comments make absolutely no sense, as usual. Just a bunch of illogical babbling.
Maybe take a day or two and think about what my comment said ?
It WILL help !
Trust me.
Ever notice how suddenly it became YOUR fault that someone didn't understand what you wrote?
SMMFH
Nothing can help make your comments seem coherent.
That "Black and White" shit can really screw someone up...… I guess.
I shoulda been more "Gray".
I happen to think that people on a blog site should try to write actual sentences if they want people to understand what they're trying to say, rather than blathering and babbling and overusing stupid emoticons. If someone chooses not to write actual sentences, they shouldn't be surprised when people assume they're stupid.
Might want to rethink who is stupid if emoticons are not understood.
Assuming stuff usually makes the person doing the assuming look foolish.
Are you sure you weren't so fixated on the "emoticon", it caused you to ignore the actual "Sentence" and it's "Meaning" ?
Apparently, fixating on leads to .
Does that make a gateway emoticon?
you addict!
when your done ticklin your buddy's belly, maybe Frick can scratch Fracks' back
asz a side job
Looks like someone is upset about being left out!
That is a good question. They hate even more that we openly state that we believe.
Ain’t that the truth! 👍👏
👍👏🤭😎😂
So it would seem.
Wow.....that was a Great Comment !
Apparently, it's over your head.
Clearly you didn't get it. But you go right on believing you did if it makes you feel better.
You're not sure ?
Oh come on. They have pond scum descended logic on their side that can’t fathom a higher power and realms beyond limited human thinking and intelligence. Of course they are not sure.
Feel free to prove there's a "higher power" or other realms! Then your statement might have merit. Because so far, it's little more than an active imagination at best.
Gotta just love it when pseudo-intellectuals think that they are the only ones smart enough to understand something.
That elitism cost y'all an election already,
Trying for two?
And you feel free to prove that there is no God.
Why does it bother you so much that others believe?
Do you hold the same contempt and make the same derisive comments to your liberal politicians who believe in God?
How can you even bring yourself to actually vote for someone you consider illogical?
"Life" seems to be a good starter !
thanx.
R u supposing U r ever going to make one ?
A logical fallacy. One cannot prove the nonexistence of something.
It doesn't. I've said that before. What makes you think it does.
I hold most, if not all politicians in contempt. What's your point?
Whom have I voted for specifically? Or are you just making Strawman arguments?
Meaningless tripe. it's about what is demonstrable. So far, believers who posit god, "higher powers," or "realms" as real or true have yet to provide one shred of evidence to support their claims. And yet, they presume to claim such things exist or actually talk as if they understand it, even if a little? Who's being "pseudo-intellectual" again?
How is life proof of a higher power exactly?
Does he mean Death is Not proof of a Lower powerless unseen unsightly unforeseen, as well...?
Obviously not for you or i to answer, but i'm glad to see it is not just it is me.
Maybe try and "Think" (for a change) about all the "Different" types of "Life" that exists on this planet, then ask yourself.....why !
"Logic" may be able to tell us that there is life ..... DUH (and that's all it can do), but it does a Terrible job at explaining "WHY", and the big stickler in "Logic" is, they "Why" such a "Different" amount of life exists.
Someone, or something, has a plan.
Your "glass" is always almost "Empty', isn't it.
Read "THE" book !
So you start off with a personal attack. how droll.
Evolution is why!
Logically, scientific experiments and observations must be and have been conducted to possibly explain how life originally arose. And evolution explains how it diversified.
Evolution explains WHY there is such a DIFFERENT amount of life.
A baseless assumption for which there is no supporting evidence.
No attack at all. Someone clearly wasn't understanding what was said.
Oh LOOK !...………..Squirrel !
"Evolution explains WHY there is such a DIFFERENT amount of life."
Where the hell do you get that idea ?
Logic ?
So a "Giraffe" came from an "Elephant" !
Got it !
Your reply demonstrates a profound ignorance and lack of understanding of evolution.
"Enlighten" me on how "Evolution" explains the "Why".
Speciation. Look up the Phylogenetic Tree. Did you even bother to take high school biology?
Note that Gordy wrote this:
No doubt you are trying to play a semantics game and are trying to twist this into a philosophical question of why (something) chose to have so much biodiversity on the planet rather than the scientific why (Gordy's point) which is an explanation for the observation of so much diversity of life.
Google 'biodiversity' and you will find plenty of explanations. Here is one of the many explanations of this most basic aspect of evolutionary science:
In simple terms, variations (mutations) occur during the reproductive process. The variations (in the resulting DNA) that are beneficial to continuation of the species are passed on to progeny. When these new generations travel and experience different environments they are subjected to very different conditions for survival. These different conditions select for different variations to the point of ultimately (typically over much time) producing a variety of species (speciation). Speciation is part of the science of evolution; which —as Gordy notes— explains why this occurs.
Well said TiG. He was was probabably trying to infer a supernatural component or explanation, something along the lines of "God did it."
It would not surprise me. Imagine someone arguing against the statement: 'God gets what God wants' where God is defined as the unique creator entity that is both omnipotent and omniscient. Imagine arguing that the epitome of power and knowledge (how does one define something more powerful or knowledgeable?) could be prevented from getting its way.
Very little, at this point, will surprise me.
At this point, me either.
Your "Speech" has nothing more to do than how each species progressed. It explains "NOTHING" on "WHY" there are different "Species".
So …………….."Giraffes" do come from "Elephants" ?
How "Droll" !
Interbreeding to create a "New" Breed" is your answer ?
I've not seen someone note that.
In my life, I was always under the impression...."God let's you choose whatever you want", and the judgement day comes at YOUR "end of life" !
Do you also think evolutionary science suggests humans came from chimpanzees?
If God wants everyone to choose what they want then that is what He wants. By definition, nothing is more powerful than a unique omnipotent, omniscient entity.
If one is "Scared" about what they've done in life !
It Is Me is a "Happy Camper" with "LIFE" !
"If God wants everyone to choose what they want then that is what He wants. "
Doesn't everyone want the same ?
Incoherent.
Did "Logic" tell you to note that ?
I guess "Simple" isn't in the "Logical" mindset ?
Are you asking "It Is Me", why there are different species on this planet ?
You don't know ?
First of all, Halloween has long ago been embraced as a Catholic holiday. It is the summation of All Saints Day. Its origins might be pagan, but so is the Christmas tree, but I bet you have one.
Now if you don't want to celebrate Halloween, that is fine. But you shouldn't be mocking someone else's beliefs since that would make this article Ironic.
Also, the article cited by The Pew in this article has the title, In The US, the Decline of Christianity is Rapid.
You need to read your source material better.
Keep demonstrating your ignorance about evolution. Especially with this statement of yours: "It explains "NOTHING" on "WHY" there are different "Species".
If you understood evolution, you would know why.
If there was a god, there would be no such thing as choice. And judgement day is just religious nonsense meant to scare people into obedience.
Go ahead and provide your own explanation as to why there are different species on the planet.
I don't think you know what "Evolution" means.
Even what TiG put up discusses "Species" and how each "Species" changes. That's NOTHING more than an "Evolution" of each "Species". Not an "Evolution" of "Species" difference.
"If there was a god, there would be no such thing as choice."
Which "Human" is it that told you that ?
You should have stopped there.
I know exactly what it means, and far more than you I bet.
A species that changes, even into a new species, is evolution.
No one. It's simple logic
That's so ……. Cute !
I don't cut your SHIT off, mon ami, to make a point.
I let your entire comment stand.
"A species that changes, even into a new species, is evolution."
All 1.2 Million of those species ?
Did an "Elephant" morph into a "Giraffe" or not.
"No one. It's simple logic"
You should STOP trying to make "Logic" so complicated then (reference your twisting comments), if it's that "Simple" !
Let me know when you have a point.
All species.
Of course not. But if you really understood evolution, you would know they share a common ancestor.
It is simple. But if you find it complicated, then perhaps the problem lies with you.
religion is a business. tax it like one.
The separation of church and state demands that there be no government taxation upon churches and that they be non profit organizations and charitable organizations. The power to tax is the power to destroy and government has absolutely no legitimate role in determining religious beliefs or restricting the free exercise there of.
To be really separate, religion should pay taxes otherwise non religious people and members of small or low budget or religions that don't build up wealth end up supporting the big churches with taxes higher than they would be if the big churches paid their fair share.
All the people in the church already pay taxes on their income and don’t need to be taxed based on exercising their free association and assembly rights. The power to tax is the power to destroy and we should never give government that kind of power over religious associations. Most religions are also non profit charities and some are non profit education and medical facilities as well.
Why should church run private schools be taxed when no other non profit private school is? Should church run non profit hospitals be taxed while hospitals 🏥 operated by other non profits not be taxed. Why are churches unique among non profit organizations?
Separation also demands that churches do not engage in political activities or otherwise attempt to steer political course or candidates.
No non profit c-3 is supposed to be directly involved in politics. That doesn’t only apply to churches.
Then Jay Sekulow should not be representing the President given his involvement in ALJC which is the epitome of politics
There are at least 12 churches in my small town, if they paid taxes then my taxes would be lower. I am subsidizing them.
church members are purchasing an intangible product when they put money into the collection plate. a ticket to heaven as it were. tax it.
Jay Sekulow is doing his legal work as himself acting as an individual. It’s not that the ACLJ is Trumps lawyer. His job as leader of the ACLJ does not in any way preclude his doing any other job.
Putting money in an offering plate buys nothing at all.
It is still tax deductible, right?
It's still an income.
For those of us who itemize. Most people don’t give away $100 to get $20-$40 unless they believe in what they are doing. I don’t itemize and thus gain no refund for it. Even the rich would be better off keeping their money at being taxed 40% than giving it all away and getting 40% of it back.
Only if we can tax secularists tickets to the hot 🥵 place 🔥
secular taxpayers already make up the difference in taxes on the revenue lost in tax exempt scams run by religious hypocrites to further their political agendas, in violation of the 1st amendment establishment clause. religious based socialism in a nutshell. the existence of millionaire teavangelical preachers contradicts religious ideology.
Don't people have to pay for the church education programs? PreK?
Where is it free?
Gee CH4P, these religious diatribes need more juice. Shoot some Lysergic Acid Diethylamide into the mix. The persecution of the persecuting christians are becoming just a bit to laze faire.
You know, need more angles.
There is no diatribe here except from the secularist responses to the written words of the reasonable seeded article
The replies so far to this seed prove the following to be true: A war on religious liberty is being aggressively waged against Americans of all faiths by coercive secular progressives tying their future political power to stripping citizens of their first constitutional right. As President Trump noted in his September address at the United Nations , “No right is more fundamental … than the right to follow one’s religious convictions. Too often, people in positions of power preach diversity while silencing, shunning, or censoring the faithful.”
The destruction of religious freedom creates an environment for the erosion of other freedoms. The case against the anti-faith agenda has three underlying constructs—inherent contradictions in its position, the value of faith communities to society, and the Constitution itself.
The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” It put the right to worship (or not worship) before freedoms of speech, press, assembly and petition.
Secularists demand “separations of church and state,” a clause that appears nowhere in U.S. law, but in an 1802 letter Thomas Jefferson wrote emphasizing that faith resides between a person and God with no interference from the state. Perhaps if Jefferson wrote “protecting the church from the state” progressives would be marginally less eager to manipulate its meaning for their self-serving ends.
Neither those elected to run the government nor the activist class have any right or authority to impose their religious or non-religious will on others. This is the inarguable meaning and application of the clause.
The ridiculous hypocrisy of the left’s version of “separating” church from state is stark. Removing charitable tax exemption from churches that don’t meet the same-sex marriage policy demands of candidate O’Rourke and other progressives is the opposite of separating church and state. It would instead combine them. Taxing churches ties them to Congress, the judiciary, IRS and U.S. Treasury, making people of faith subject to the whims of political parties, activists and revenue collection agencies.
Hung up on the same sex thing?
Well, is it okay to cut an avocado and put the pieces into a bowl of Cheerios?
PROTECTING THE CIVIL RIGHTSOF ALL AMERICANS
WE PROTECT YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
The American Civil Rights Union (ACRU) is dedicated to defending the constitutionally-protected civil rights of all Americans. Every one of our essential rights depends on our ability to freely choose our leaders. America’s greatest civil right—self-governance—requires ensuring that our elections are conducted fairly and honestly.
The ACRU monitors and counters organizations that threaten our constitutional rights and promotes election integrity, government transparency and constitutional governance.
The ACRU stands against harmful, anti-constitutional ideologies that have taken hold in our nation’s courts, law schools and bureaucracies. While other organizations promote entitlements and immoral license in the name of “liberties” and “identity” politics, the ACRU defends the civil rights for all set forth at America’s founding through:
LITIGATION: The ACRU is seeking a landmark interpretation of federal law to ensure the accuracy of voter registration rolls—the key to preventing vote fraud.
AMICUS SUPPORT: The ACRU provides critical constitutional arguments in key civil rights cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and the Appellate Courts.
PROTECTING AMERICAN VALUES: The ACRU works to ensure that those who believe in traditional moral values remain free to hold, express, teach and practice those beliefs—not just in their homes but also in their businesses and in the public square.
DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION: The ACRU holds that the U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights is the greatest legal document ever conceived by man and should be interpreted as written, not subject to the prevailing political winds.
The ACRU was a hobby of Bob Carleson ( RiP 2006 ) which he started in 1998 and has been continued by his bride.
They filed 15 amicus briefs in 1998, apparently only 5 more since then, and had one case against Starr County 'settled" in which Starr County agreed to pay them $55,000.00 in legal fees.
It's little more than a sham which joins Judicial Watch lawsuits to give JW the impression of the credibility "of numbers".
Ambulance chasers have more credibility and practice more law with actual results compared to ACRU.
Secular progressives and places like SPLC and MBFC hate it when we conservatives create conservative alternative organizations to compete against themselves.
Voting Integrity Institute
ACRU Litigation
Support our Mission (donate)
Latest Commentary
Get the latest on all important issues by subscribing to our e-newsletter.
MEDIA ROOM
Sanctuary Cities Endanger Americans
October 22nd, 2019
ACRU Board Member and Former Attorney General Edwin Meese III Honored with the Presidential Medal of Freedom
October 11th, 2019
SCOTUS Will Decide Whether Encouraging Illegal Immigration Is Protected Speech
October 9th, 2019
Meet Kyle Frese: Trump Hater, Federal Employee, Arrested for Leaking National Security Secrets
October 9th, 2019
More News and Commentary from our Experts →
OUR VOTING INTEGRITY INSTITUTE
Vote fraud steals your most precious civil right. See how the ACRU’s Voting Integrity Institute is working to clean up voter rolls and preserve this right for you and future generations.
READ THE ELECTION INTEGRITY BULLETIN →
HELP US PROTECT YOUR VOTE
Voting and self-governance requires confidence in our public institutions, especially the integrity of our election process. Help us restore that integrity and confidence.
READ MORE →
And we also have the ACLJ to protect us from our domestic enemies as well.
That's correct, per their own website, all they do now is "legal writing"
besides tweeting.
While they do good, they are more focused on Africa and Europe, but they are legitimate and have actual staffs.
And their founder is one of Trumps lawyers.
One would think you would look before you speak.
Pat Robertson is the founder and NOT a practicing lawyer.
Too funny that it takes a Messianic Jew like Jay Sekulow to defend Evangelicals and other Christians around the world.
After filing for bankruptcy in 1987 ( $13M ) he eventually became Chief Counsel for Robertson and the ADLJ.
Good thing he's been doing well for the last 28 years and accumulated $20M for retirement
because working for Trump isn't likely to enrich Jay any further.
NEW CONTENT
US Attorney Durham’s Review Now a Criminal Investigation
By Jordan Sekulow yesterdayWe have quite the breaking news story as U.S. Attorney Durham’s review of the Russia inquiry and the origins of the Russia investigations has now turned into an official criminal investigation. On today’s Jay Sekulow Live , we discussed news that many of us have been waiting for ever since Attorney General Bill Barr announced U.S. Attorney John Durham had been appointed to investigate the origins of the Russia probe which began with the FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation, and led to the... READ MORE
New Testimony & Video Undercuts Planned Parenthood’s Case
By Matthew Clark2 days agoTwo big things happened this week in our trial against Planned Parenthood. One of the Defendants majorly undercut Planned Parenthood’s case, explaining what he thought Planned Parenthood “bought all of, was this business model that runs directly contrary to the federal law in fetal tissue sales.” And in a major moment in the trial, a video of an ABC News 20/20 undercover investigative report that first exposed illegality in the fetal tissue procurement and abortion industries was played for the... READ MORE
JSL: McConnell Joins Graham Resolution Condemning Inquiry
By Jay Sekulow2 days agoSenate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell signed on to Senator Lindsey Graham’s resolution condemning the House impeachment inquiry. On today’s Jay Sekulow Live, we discussed the impact the resolution and how much it matters that Senator McConnell signed on to it. Jordan made a good point when he said that McConnell’s involvement is really important because he can really direct the Caucus due to his influence as Majority Leader. ACLJ Director of Government Affairs Thann Bennett described the... READ MORE
JSL: Sen. Graham's Resolution Condemning House Democrats
By Jay Sekulow3 days agoSenator Lindsey Graham said that he will be introducing a Resolution in the Senate condemning the House process on the impeachment inquiry. On today’s Jay Sekulow Live we discussed Senator Graham’s forthcoming resolution to condemn the House process, and also provided an update regarding ACLJ client, imprisoned Pastor John Cao. Last night on Fox News , Senator Graham said about the House impeachment inquiry process: This is un-American at its core. What the House of Representatives is doing is... READ MORE
U.N. Working Group Urges China to Release Pastor Cao
By CeCe Heil4 days agoIn a major development in the case of imprisoned Christian Pastor John Cao – a U.S. Legal Permanent Resident – the United Nation’s Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) has just released its opinion regarding his wrongful arrest and imprisonment. The opinion states: [T]aking into account all of the circumstances of the case, the appropriate remedy would be to release Mr. Cao immediately and accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with... READ MORE
JSL: Trump Tax Return Fight Likely Heads to Supreme Court
By Jordan Sekulow4 days agoThe Trump tax return legal battle is likely heading to the U.S. Supreme Court, and if so, the President’s outside legal team – aka my dad Jay Sekulow and myself, among others – will be handling that case. On today’s Jay Sekulow Live , we discussed the ongoing battle regarding the President’s tax returns and briefly touched on Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren’s continued silence regarding Hillary Clinton’s attack on Tulsi Gabbard. The Manhattan District Attorney, Cyrus Vance, and President Trump’s... READ MORE
Abortionist Who Discussed “Crushing” Babies Testifies
By Matthew Clark5 days agoIn another big development in our trial against Planned Parenthood, the judge, for the first time, allowed a significant portion of one of the undercover videos to be played for the jury as the Planned Parenthood abortionist who discussed “crushing” babies to harvest their organs was on the stand. Dr. Deborah Nucatola performed abortions for 21 years and was the Senior Director of Medical Services at PPFA. She testified that she performs "Between 50 and 200" abortions a month. On cross... READ MORE
JSL - Hillary Clinton Predicts: Russian Agents to Blame
By Jordan Sekulow5 days agoIt’s shocking, but at this point anything is possible. Hillary Clinton has predicted that a Russian agent or agents are going to be to blame when the Democrats lose in 2020. But one of those so-called agents is a current Democrat candidate. On today’s show we discussed Hillary Clinton’s unprovoked attack on Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, when she made a statement on the Campaign HQ Podcast – hosted by former Obama Campaign Manager David Plouffe – that a current Democrat candidate for President... READ MORE
The Facts About the Ongoing Impeachment Inquiry
By Wesley Smith6 days agoSince Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi summarily announced an official impeachment inquiry--something that in itself is absurd and unprecedented in the 243-year history of the United States, she continues to double down on her action—all while trying to protect her caucus politically, and simultaneously trying to appease the left-wing fringe of her party. It is no easy task. However, it is a conundrum of her own making. Recently, when questioned about why the full House... READ MORE
Abortionist Jokes About Selling Body Parts for Lamborghini
By Jay Sekulow8 days agoThe ACLJ is in week 3 of a trial involving Planned Parenthood. Earlier this week, a Planned Parenthood abortionist testified under oath that they had stated they wanted a Lamborghini in exchange for babies’ body parts. On today’s Jay Sekulow Live , we discussed the updates regarding the trial involving Planned Parenthood and also touched on the ridiculous new additions to the U.N. Human Rights Council. The Planned Parenthood abortionist claimed that the statement about wanting a Lamborghini was... READ MORE
ACLJ, just happens to line the pockets of Jay Sekulow and the Pat Robertson family while giving their customers what they want to hear 24/7/365 by internet, blog, podcast and radio.
Credibility? Not so much.
Wanna bet what the ACLU ratings are?
Who cares? If I needed to be defended it would be the ACLJ or better yet Alliance Defending Freedom that would protect me, not the partisan hacks at All Criminal Leftists United.
The difference is, that the ACLU will defend anyone, even you and I.
The ACRU or ACLJ, not so much.
But Thanks for actually responding.
Ciao.
the ADF is nothing more than a rightwing money laundry hiding behind it's tax exempt status, at the expense of all taxpayers, just like most religious organizations. a prime example of nonsecular socialism. all religious businesses deserve intensive government scrutiny with every penny accounted for.
Alliance Defending Freedom Advocates for Your Right to Freely Live out Your Faith.
We've Defended Your Freedom Since 1994
The morning Alliance Defending Freedom was launched, Dr. Bill Bright told a story about a little boy who was lost in a wheat field. The townspeople frantically searched for the boy, but they couldn’t find him. Finally, one of the searchers suggested that they all hold hands and walk together across the field. They found the boy, but sadly, not in time to save his life. One of the searchers lamented, "If we had only linked arms sooner..."
Dr. Bright compared the town’s story to the Christian community.
The gathered Christian leaders—more than 30 founders of ADF—recognized that Christians, like the town, needed to unite in order to defend religious freedom before it was too late.
And so, Alliance Defending Freedom was launched on January 31, 1994 to ensure that religious freedom did not share the same fate as the boy in the field.
Building an Alliance for Victory
With that launch, the Christian community gained growing awareness that the threats to its freedom were multiplying. The legal system, which was built on a moral and Christian foundation, had been steadily moving against religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and marriage and family. And very few Christians were showing up in court to put up a fight.
By funding cases, training attorneys, and successfully advocating for freedom in court, Alliance Defending Freedom changed that.
It is not enough to just win cases; we must change the culture, and the strategy of Alliance Defending Freedom ensures lasting victory.
To learn more about what we are doing, visit our key issues: religious freedom, sanctity of life, and marriage and family.
3,400+
300+
1.1M+
$219M+
2,100+
$50M+
We're Here to Win
When Alan Sears was approached to lead ADF, he wanted to make sure of one thing: Alliance Defending Freedom would be committed to winning. And within only a few short weeks of its launch, ADF was funding a case at the U.S. Supreme Court and captured the first victory of many for religious freedom. True to this commitment . . .
Alliance Defending Freedom is dedicated to victory.
Winning nearly 80% of all cases.
Playing a role in 55 victories at the United States Supreme Court.
Advocating in hundreds of international legal matters affecting religious freedom.
Across the United States, Christians are being punished for living by their convictions. As current or former clients of Alliance Defending Freedom, the individuals in this video have experienced this firsthand. Join us as we defend these clients and protect their freedom to live consistent with their faith.
Alliance Defending Freedom was created to win, and our success has affirmed religious freedom around the world. We've also trained thousands of attorneys and students who are making an impact.
Take a look at our most significant accomplishments:
VIEW OUR TIMELINEProof that you are opposed to the separation of church and state. Because with real separation the state has no power over the church.
yeah, that concept has always worked out so well in the history of this planet. /s
[Removed]
Works both ways: the church has no power over the state either.
No kidding. Who would have ever guessed? Churches as an organization have and should have no power over government and government has no power over the free exercise of religious beliefs. Individual citizens who belong to any given church can vote and be elected to serve in any capacity.
Oh please. Are you so insecure in yourself and who you are as a person that you feel the need to make anonymous macho threats about the trauma physical or emotional that you are going to cause to some Christian that crosses your path. That act is not one a mature adult male would project even on line.
Certainly appears that way.
Internet tough guys are always entertaining, though!
Based on past discussions relating to church-state topics, some people here have a clear misunderstanding of separation or how it's applied, with some even going so far as to declare there is no separation. So it's important to reinforce the idea that separation works both ways. That being said, no one's religious liberty nor is any church being threatened by the government. That is just paranoid nonsense. Neither does separation allow an individual's religious beliefs to be made into law or public policy.
[Removed]
👍👏
The only thing that's true is the persecution complex by some individuals is alive and well.
How? What laws are being passed that removes your freedom of religion?
None...the only thing is still hiding behind religion to discriminate.
I'm well aware. Like ya said, they just want the right to be able to force their religion on people and use it to discriminate.
What religious freedoms have been taken away? What laws have been passed?
The interesting thing here is the total hostility toward religious liberty protected by the free exercise clause of the 1st amendment from secular progressives. The degree of intolerance of and bigotry toward believers is simply stunning.
The degree of ignorance and paranoia in that comment is simply stunning. But not surprising either.
[Trolling]