Wednesday, March 26, 2014


Have you noticed this?

The media, even our illustrious president, have taken to referring to our first amendment rights as “freedom of worship.”

Now contrasting that term to “freedom of religion” may not appear to be that different.

You may even think I am getting caught up in semantics (and I am always up for some antics), but I think that this is a major change that people of Chrsitian faith should be concerned about.

Recently, Colorado proposed a religious freedom amendment to the state constitution that prohibited the government from "burden[ing] a person's or religious organization's freedom of religion" unless it shows a compelling interest – which offers the highest level of protection. In comparison, the U.S. Constitution prohibits Congress from "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion.

Compare that to the proposed language submitted by a liberal group which begins: "The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever hereafter be guaranteed."

Sounds okay, doesn't it?

Did you notice that freedom of religion quickly became religious worship?

I wonder why?

Wait! There’s more…

In assessing whether government has burdened freedom of religion, a person's or a religious organization's right to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief is the ability to engage in religious practices in the privacy of a person's home or in the privacy of a religious organization's established place of worship.

And there is the agenda.

A person's free exercise of religion is only guaranteed at home or at church.

Freedom of religion encompasses many beliefs and actions, obviously including worship. But this rhetorical shift of limiting freedom of religion to only worship embodies a dangerous ideology that is shared by the current administration.

The former Soviet Union – that bastion of individual liberty and a self described atheistic country – allowed "freedom of worship" but not "freedom of religion."

Not only have President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently repeatedly used the same "freedom of worship" rhetoric, but this administration has engaged in several other hostile actions that also show a disdain for the freedom of religion, most notably when requiring religious organizations to provide services that they object to on grounds of faith (abortions, abortion-inducing drugs and contraceptives) free of charge.

Now I was recently accused of "worshiping at the feet of our founding fathers," but I do admit that I believe they were pretty smart guys who had the right idea with government-keep it small, keep it simple, or as Reagan said, keep it off our backs.
Religious freedom as intended by the founding fathers allows us the freedom to practice our religion in the public square, not confined to home or church.

Even if you are not religious, I would caution you to avoid this shift in rhetoric, these prepared remarks by those who are very careful with their choice of words.

We all need to stand up for freedom of religion to ensure that it is not whittled down to a nugget only tolerated in our own homes and churches (until they come knocking at those doors, too).

And after that right is taken from us, what will be next?

To those of you who are quick to accuse people who value personal liberty of "worshipping our founding fathers," I would caution you to not be so quick to cede power to the federal government in areas that used to be the responsibility of individuals and private charitable organizations, simply because you are "too busy getting ahead."

The smartest thing about our founding fathers?

They KNEW that power corrupts.

These "rich white guys" SHED BLOOD (and kicked the butt of the incumbent world power) in order that you would have these rights.

Do not be so quick to give those rights away.

Because at the end of the day, after all of the slurs and insults I have taken when discussing this issue, the truth still stands that there is not ONE success story we can point to where the government takes something on.

Education-billions spent, basic test scores down

Social Security-bankrupt, and the money that the current working population has contributed was squandered

Look at every area the federal government has taken on and name ONE they have done well.

THAT is what I object to.

In addition to supporting the Constitution, I support a very logical position-do not throw good money after bad.


  1. I think the Bill of Rights is clear on religion. Anytime the government seeks to alter the language SOMEONE (or lots of someones) is going to lose. The law appears to be all about the "language," which is why *I think* lawyers use terms like the "letter of the law." This new worship speak is designed to change the language, and eventually the letter of the law. People need to be very aware of the power of words when they become laws. Words can be the sword that take your freedom.

    I know this to be true. The IRS is the sword that takes our money. They do it within the letter of the law. But, I've already posted about that... And I am beginning to let this go (I think) after exhausting my rage at the machine.

    Of course, every time I wind down, the "machine" does something else.

    1. What amazes me, Robin, is that people are so complacent when the right that is being infringed is one that is not important to them, and they do not realize that once you let government start to take rights away, it's kind of like the camel's nose under the tent...


  2. The devil is always in the details.

    For examples...

    The United Nations' 'Universal Declaration Of Human Rights' includes the following toward the end of it:

    Article 29.

    (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
    (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
    (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

    Read that carefully and you'll see that they just said that they can revoke all of the rights previously mentioned when the U.N. determines it's necessary for the greater good.

    Or, how about the 'Humanist Manifesto 2000'?

    It states that...

    The right to believe and practice one's religion or belief without discrimination must be respected. The equivalent freedom, not to practice religion, should be afforded to religious dissenters, agnostics, and atheists, whose views deserve no lesser respect.

    Interestingly though, only 6 paragraphs earlier, the Manifesto also said...

    Education should include an appreciation of the natural, biological, and social sciences. The theory of evolution and the standards of ecology should also be studied.

    Hmmm.... Too bad for those folks who believe in The God of The Bible who created human beings without any "natural" evolutionary process.

    As I said, the devil can always be found in the details.

    ~ D-FensDogg
    'Loyal American Underground'

    1. Good thing there's no such thing as the devil!

      I saw an awful lot of images when searching for items for this post that spoke to "freedom from religion."

      Sadly, this really goes back to that book "Original Intent." Most people have absolutely no idea what it is that the first amendment is protecting.

  3. Not surprising that the group so long active in the re-writing of history should take a turn at language. Not that they already haven't- see "global warming vs climate change". Truth is only a tool to be used when convenient.

    I heard Rush today saying that the new Democrat party line in the next elections will be, "If the republican gets in, he will try to impeach President Obama". Oh, dear, the poor POTUS! But it will scare all of his "ethnic brothers" enough to get them to vote- five or six times, if necessary.

    I ptiy those people, really. They don't realize when Jesus said "the gates of hell will not stand against it," That He was not referring to an earthly Church... and that they are the ones who make up the gates.

    1. I agree with your inclination to pity them. I think so many of these people who are duped into this PC way of thinking really are just that-duped.

  4. You make a good point - what a difference a word makes. Even removing or replacing a comma can change the whole meaning of a sentence. BUT the real problem is the fact that 'We the people' let them get away with it. These same folks who are too busy 'getting ahead' (are you kidding me - is anybody really getting ahead?) already put up with all forms of illegal government...think the Fed, and the IRS, for starters. Seems like most folks; 'don't know what they got till it's gone'. Freedom of just about anything is a thing of the past, at least in this country.

    1. FAE-a lot of the quotes were from an e-mail exchange I had with a family member, who assumed an awful lot of things about me where he has never bothered to ask. His attitude on healthcare borders on Marxist, and while I applaud his sentiment, I question his trust in our elected officials, as well as his assumption that these problems are so big that the government has to tackle them.

  5. Wow, is religion the new smoking? "You may not pray in public. If you do pray, you must pray 20 feet away from the building and may not pray around small children. Thank you for respecting the rights of those who do not pray and infecting them with your cancer."

    1. Well, Bryan-we do not want people suffering from secondhand grace, do we?

  6. Playing with words has become so common in our age. I suppose this has happened throughout history, but with media dissemination of information the language changes so quickly with subtlety and nuance. It's trickery opening doors of deception that we will pay for dearly in the future as we are already paying for now. Most of this language play doesn't even get noticed and so quickly it becomes just accepted.

    It is scary.

    A Few Words