Jefferson's immortal phrase "wall of separation between church and state" has become a topic of much debate. I find that paradoxical in that it comes from a personal letter sent between men who were not part of the Constitutional convention. From all the writings of Thomas Jefferson, I cannot conclude that it was ever his intent to dissuade men from religion or to squelch their beliefs or morality. Rather, I think he might consider it a great breach of honour to assault the faith of another person. At the very least, it's exceptionally tacky.
If we are to consider letters as authoritative, I have a few I'd like to enter as evidence. I'm sure you also have letters from former relationships professing "undying love" that is no longer welcome, let alone gospel. Personal letters are not necessarily valuable; unless of course twitter and instagram are now the substance of great literature. No no, I feel this is more a convenient way for them to phrase a rhetorical argument that serves them no matter which way they cut the political cake.
As the world reels in the wake of anti-American protests among Muslims, the President calls for toleration of Muslims. The UN calls for a mandate to criminalize any derogatory reference to Muslims, pretending that 1000 years of crusades somehow didn't happen and didn't matter. In doing this, they propose to violate the Constitution itself that prohibits Congress from making any law establishing any special privileges for any Faith or prohibiting the free exercise of the same. What other Faith has received this kind of protection, let alone the offer thereof from the chief executive's office?
I side with the Bill of Rights on this issue. I do not believe it just to amingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied. Yet, that is exactly what we're seeing right before our very eyes as they mingle religious influence and seek to afford special privileges to Islam. However, as they prop up some religions, they beat down others. When they cannot do it by fiat, they do it in public and popular pressure, making it uncool to stand for any kind of moral code unless that code's only commandment is "Thou shalt not get found out, and if thou art found out, at least get rich selling a sensationalized memoir". It is evil to stand for the family, for abstinence, for unborn babies, for just war, and the like, but it is ok to riot in the street, practice witchcraft, and pray to the Rolling Stones. In America, you are free to believe and live as you like unless you're a Christian or a Jew.
Just after the riots began, I tweeted before I heard it anywhere else about why it's ok to mock Romney but why one must apologize to Muslims. While the Muslim miscreants rape and pillage and destroy, nobody worries about upsetting a Mormon. That's because Mormons don't pull people's arms out of their sockets when they lose. When was the last time a Mormon blew up a building in the name of their religion? It is no mark of maturity to say "give me what I want or I will be a miscreant".
As Obama protracts his war on faith and the Faith, we cling to our bibles. As he forces churches to provide things contrary to their dogma, we continue to look to God. I have said before that the most important thing we can do is to repent and bind the Lord to bless us with chains of righteousness. Until then, the state of the church, like that of the world at large, will remain precarious. God will deliver us, but He is only bound when we do what He says. How well are you doing?
No comments:
Post a Comment