Can America Afford Moonbat Theology Politically?

nobody@vox.com(theway2k) — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:52:32 -0600

Let us read the bed rock of civil rights in America today:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (First Amendment)

The problem the Christian Right and many Conservatives have with Liberal Activist Judges and Justices is the interpretation of “Establishment Clause.” The Left and/or Progressives believe the implication of the clause is that religion can have zero association with anything taxpayer supported on all levels of government. The Christian Right and many Conservatives believe the clause merely prohibits the Federal Government from establishing a CHRISTIAN DENOMINATION as the religion of the land or nation. Thus the Christian Right believes the symbols of the moral foundations of America (i.e. Judeo-Christianity) are inclusive on public lands as long as the Federal Government does not establish the symbolism as representative of a particular Christian Denomination.

Now let’s look at the next clause of the First Amendment: [Congress shall make no law] prohibiting the free exercise thereof (i.e. religion).

Everybody from the fringe Left to the fringe Right pretty much understands this to mean the Federal Government cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion, in other words – Freedom of Religion.

Unfortunately the Leftist interpretation of the Establishment Clause has become a weapon aimed at Christianity’s free exercise of Religion in recent years. Since the Leftists in the Judiciary have become firm on the non-existent Constitutional term “Separation of Church and State,” the Christian religion has slowly been exorcised from a public forum (particularly in public schools) with the unconstitutional promotion of non-Christian religions in public schools.

The primary case in point is that schools are prohibited from allowing Bible reading or Christian cultural history to be taught yet alternative religions and the humanist religion of Secular Humanism are becoming mandated norms in our public schools.

Religions such as Mohammedanism, Hinduism and Buddhism (to name a few) are required as practicing role models to instill a counter Christian cultural understanding of other religions. The worst example is the forcing of students to recite the Quran and pray toward Mecca with the weak explanation of teaching the understanding of alternative cultures and religions. Hello! Christianity is prohibited in the class room.

Another religion being foistered among the young are the various New Age cultic religions propagated into schools and public forums as an alternative to Christianity.

I don’t have a problem of stacking various religions equally in the class room comparatively; however Christianity is not part of that comparison. Leftists whine of “Separation of Church and State” and thus prohibit the equal ground of Christian ethos and morality to be taught equally with the alternative religions. This directly breaks the second clause of the First Amendment by prohibiting the free exercise of Christianity and establishing the study of other religions as an alternative to Christianity.

Some might say, “Did you see the word ‘Secular’ in Secular Humanism?” The very word “secular” denotes something other than religion. The reality of course is that the tenets of Secular Humanism have taken on a cultic value. Thus all that defines a religion such as setting values and tenets and mindsets that compete with other religions have transformed Secular Humanism into a religion. The only difference from Secular Humanism from other Religions is that the god of Secular Humanism is the relative terms of human philosophy; ergo humanity collectively is god.

Now let’s bring this discussion home about Presidential Candidate Barak Obama running for the Democratic Party nomination.

Obama is an articulate charismatic speaker. This has aided him in catching up in the polls to his adversarial harsh sounding rival Hillary Clinton. Not too long ago Hillary was thought of as the unstoppable Queen of the hill that many felt was a certainty for the Democratic Party nomination.

Enter Oprah Winfrey into the endorsement fray. Oprah not only endorses Obama but is actively campaigning for an Obama nomination. And it is her right to do so.

If Oprah is successful in knocking the Queen off the top of the hill with Obama replacing Hillary as the Democratic Party nomination, then you Christian Right people should know a few things about Oprah personal religious beliefs that she is entirely free to practice.

Oprah is a devoted New Ager that hangs with New Age big dogs such as Marianne Williamson and Neal Donald Walsch. Oprah is heavily hooked into the New Age principles of “A Course in Miracles.” All this is no big deal as far as the freedom of religion goes.

Here is my concern. Obama is not exactly a moderate. He has a Mohammedan past and attends what the Christian Right would term a progressive Church. The term “progressive” is another way of saying liberal. The Denomination that Obama attends is the United Church of Christ (UCC), which is notorious for abandoning the Scriptures of the Bible as Divine and supports such things as homosexual rights and abortion.

So I am thinking Hillary is a Leftie; however Obama by association is even more a fringe moonbat Leftie. And Oprah is using her star power and influence to hook Obama’s charisma to the Democratic Party.

For Conservatives and the Christian Right, this is dangerous stuff!

JRH

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

theway2k’s blog

Can America Afford Moonbat Theology Politically?