Where is the ACLU and Barry Lynn?

[red states rule]

I certainly have no problems with judges interpreting the constitution to protect minority rights in the face of a mob mentality majority that would trample on them. For example, just because the collective will might wish to send all muslims or blacks or gays to internment camps, I don't think that we should be allowed to do so... you tend to think that gays marrying one another is a bad thing.... personally, I think it is none of your fucking business. period. And I would love for someone to explain to me how two men marrying one another negatively impacts anyone ELSE's marriage.

Yes, libs thought gay marriage would be a winner for them - it is not. To the moonbat left, that means most Americans are racist

 

[FredVonFlash]

to liberals, government is God

It is the Counterfeit Christian Communistic Conservatives who believe that government has as much authority over religion as God.

 

[red states rule]

It is the Counterfeit Christian Communistic Conservatives who believe that government has as much authority over religion as God.

I do not see any part of the government trying to impose any form of Religion on America

However, I see libs trying to remove all references of God from the public view. Every year America endures the annual war on Christmas, moonbat libs trying to remove "In God We Trust" from our money, panty wearing lib being offended over a movie poster at a Christmas pagent, and pointy headed liberal pinheads wanting to sue schools because kids may sing Christmas Carols

 

[FredVonFlash]

why are libs and the Barry Lynn attacking conservatives when they speak at a Church of religious university?

You have yet to establish that Barry Lynn attacks conservatives when they speak at a Church of religious university.

the ACLU and People for the Seperation of Church and State never goes after black Churches when they endorse a Dem

You have yet to establish that a black Church endorsed a Dem.

they savage any other Church and threaten to take them to court if they endorse a Republican

You have not shown that the ACLU and People for the Separation of Church and State savage any other Church and threaten to take them to court if they endorse a Republican.

 

[red states rule]

You have yet to establish that Barry Lynn attacks conservatives when they speak at a Church of religious university.



You have yet to establish that a black Church endorsed a Dem.



You have not shown that the ACLU and People for the Separation of Church and State savage any other Church and threaten to take them to court if they endorse a Republican.

Are you this fucking dense and stupid or are you just playing the role of a typical lib denying the facts and playing dumb?

 

[red states rule]

I posted a long list of Bill Clinton making political statements in a Church

Here is an example of Barry Lynn threatening Churchs that do not support liberal views

Political snitches
monitor sermons
Groups threaten churches with loss
of tax-exempt status over activism

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 23, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Joseph Farah
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com


WASHINGTON – At least two organizations are monitoring the content of Sunday sermons by U.S. pastors and threatening to report churches to the Internal Revenue Service if they hear political messages they deem inappropriate under federal guidelines on tax-exempt status.

Earlier this week, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, headed by Barry Lynn, filed a complaint with the IRS against Ronnie Floyd, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Springdale, Ark., accusing him of preaching a sermon promoting President Bush's re-election July 4.

The complaint challenges the church's tax-exempt status as a religious organization.

Lynn's letter to the IRS reads, in part: "The pastor's description of the candidates' stands and their personal religious beliefs was obviously aimed at encouraging congregants to cast ballots for Bush. The church is known for its stands on social issues and its opposition to legal abortion and gay rights. By lauding Bush's stands on these and other issues and attacking (Sen. John) Kerry's, Floyd was plainly telling his congregation to be sure to vote for Bush.

"I have enclosed a videotape that includes the entire sermon as well as a partial transcript. About 45 minutes into the message, Floyd begins to discuss the differences between Bush and Kerry. Please note that even the imagery employed by the church is designed to promote Bush. A huge photo of Bush is projected onto a screen that shows the president next to an American flag. By contrast, small photos of Kerry are used that show him as one person in a larger crowd. In addition, Bush is shown signing a ban on late-term abortions, an act most church members will laud, while Kerry is shown as one of a group of senators who opposed a law banning same-sex marriage, a stand most church members will likely oppose."

Organizations granted tax-free status under federal law "may not participate at all in campaign activity for or against political candidates," according to published IRS guidelines.

According to IRS regulations, tax-exempt organizations "are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position, verbal or written, made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise tax."

The guidelines add: "The political campaign activity prohibition is not intended to restrict free expression on political matters by leaders of organizations speaking for themselves, as individuals. Nor are leaders prohibited from speaking about important issues of public policy. However, for their organizations to remain tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3), leaders cannot make partisan comments in official organization publications or at official functions."

Churches may invite candidates to speak to the congregation during an election, as long as all candidates are afforded an equal opportunity to speak, according to the guidelines.

A church spokesman denies the pastor crossed the line, saying the pastor never told the church body how to vote.

But Americans United for Separation of Church and State is not the only organization looking to pick a fight with pastors who get too political this year.

In Kansas, monitors from the Mainstream Coalition are being accused of creating a "chilling effect" on the sermons in that state's churches.

Last month, the Mainstream Coalition announced it would send volunteers into area churches to see whether pastors were abiding by federal laws governing political activity by non-profit institutions.

While the group maintains it is non-partisan and objects across the board to all kinds of politicking in the pews, the organization's website shows the Mainstream Coalition has a strong political agenda of its own. Policy statements posted include the following:

strong support of Roe v. Wade
strong support of late-term abortions
strong support of sex education
strong support of human cloning
strong support of hate-crime laws
strong support of gun control
strong support for teaching of evolution
strong opposition to prayer in schools
strong opposition even to the wearing of religious symbols on government property
Some might question just how mainstream those positions are. Would such a group, for instance, object to the use of churches to promote politicians who support such an agenda?

Currently, Mainstream has about 100 volunteers monitoring churches mostly in the Kansas City suburbs.

Americans United, meanwhile, filed another complaint this month with the IRS against the Rev. Jerry Falwell over a column endorsing President Bush on his ministries' website. Falwell, who also writes a column for WND, said the group was waging a "scare-the-churches campaign."

Falwell told NBC News: “I do believe that pastors, religious leaders, men of God, women of God may in fact voice their personal opinions, as I often do, but only as private citizens."

In response, Lynn, formerly of the American Civil Liberties Union, told NBC News: "Falwell is playing a shell game that wouldn’t work in a backwoods carnival. It’s all about electing George Bush and using the church to do it."

The driving force behind the campaign in Kansas is the debate over same-sex marriage. In May, the Kansas House rejected a proposed amendment to the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage. Dozens of pastors joined a statewide effort to register 100,000 new voters and elect sympathetic candidates.

Mainstream's executive director, Caroline McKnight, said her organization was only trying to make sure that churches follow federal law.

According to IRS guidelines, churches cannot endorse individual candidates, and their pastors cannot use the pulpit or church newsletters to do so. The group has not yet filed any complaints, McKnight said.

But churches can compile voters' guides – though such guides are supposed to be unbiased. Pastors can preach on issues and, as individuals, endorse candidates.

McKnight said the IRS did not have the resources to monitor churches' activities, as an agency official confirmed during a seminar last week on political activity by nonprofit groups.

On Wednesday, a group called the Christian Seniors Association sent a letter to U.S. Attorney Gen. John Ashcroft and the head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division asking to have federal agents sent to the Kansas City area to stop the harassment of churches by Mainstream

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39596

 

[FredVonFlash]

How does a HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATING STUDENT violate Separation of Church and State, or the principle of no human authority over the duty which we owe our Creator, by merely MENTIONING JESUS IN HIS ACCEPTENCE SPEECH?

The mere mention of God by civil authority does not violate the principle of separation. The test is whether civil authority trespasses upon the things that are God's.

The problem is that Counterfeit Christian Communistic Conservative Republicans see no difference between God's authority over religion and civil government exercising authority over religion. They view assumptions of civil authority over religion as mere mentions of God. For example, they believe that civil government has as much authority as God over when, where and what public school students pray.

The Counterfeit Christian Communistic Conservative Republicans hate true Christianity and have turned their back on the Savior's admonition not to render unto Caesar what belongs to God. They hold the Anti-American idea that government derives its authority from God, instead of from the people. They believe that rulers are ministers of God and answer to God, not the people.

 

[red states rule]

The mere mention of God by civil authority does not violate the principle of separation. The test is whether civil authority trespasses upon the things that are God's.

The problem is that Counterfeit Christian Communistic Conservative Republicans see no difference between God's authority over religion and civil government exercising authority over religion. They view assumptions of civil authority over religion as mere mentions of God. For example, they believe that civil government has as much authority as God over when, where and what public school students pray.

The Counterfeit Christian Communistic Conservative Republicans hate true Christianity and have turned their back on the Savior's admonition not to render unto Caesar what belongs to God. They hold the Anti-American idea that government derives its authority from God, instead of from the people. They believe that rulers are ministers of God and answer to God, not the people.

Then why do libs and the ACLU have a fit over Christmas? Why do they want to remove "In God We Trust" from our money?

 

[FredVonFlash]

...you claim your Biblical quote "give unto ceasar that which is ceasars, and unto God that which is God's" commands us not to entangle that which is God's with that which is ceasars. That is simply illogical and false. It was a way for Jesus to demonstrate that what God the Father considers important and a priority is different than what man thinks is important and a priority.

Every man has the right and the duty to decide for himself what Matthew 22:21 means. I am convinced, as was the great Gilbert Beebe, who wrote in his famous 1845 sermon titled "My Kingdom is not of this world", that Matthew 22:21 clearly intimates,

"that the governments were not only distinct from each other, but that the distinction should be perpetual; and that the requisitions of Caesar, or of the governments of the nations, had to do with men as citizens of the world, and that their obligation to earthly magistrates and rulers was not relaxed nor abolished by the administration of His laws. And again, that the things of God were not to be rendered to Caesar, but unto God.

Things of a civil nature, relating to the natural rights of men, were to be settled by God's own providential appointment, by human legislation; but the things aside from a respect for and obedience to earthly potentates, in natural matters, belonging to God, such as matters of faith, of conscience, of religion, were not things over which the kings of the earth had any supervision or power, and things in which His subjects were not at liberty under any circumstances, to submit to the dictation or legislation of any other than God Himself.

The kingdom of Jesus is not of this world. In its origin, elements, provisions, policy, protection, government, or destiny. Its origin is heaven-- it is a heavenly kingdom. The King is the Lord from heaven; He said, "I proceeded forth and came out from the Father;" and again, "What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where He was before," etc. The subjects of his kingdom are of the same origin, for "Both he sanctifies, and they that are sanctified, are all of one; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren" and he said, "Thine they were and thou gavest them me." "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world." etc.

The laws for the regulation of this heavenly kingdom are not of earthly enactment. Christ the anointed of the Father, is the sole Legislator, and he, by His Spirit, writes his law upon, and sets it up in the hearts of his children." ​

James Madison appears to have also held the view that Matthew 22:21 means to separate religion from civil authority. In the following excerpt from his "Detached Memorandum", Madison equates "aberration from the sacred principle of religious liberty" to "giving to Caesar what belongs to God."

Ye States of America, which retain in your Constitutions or Codes, any aberration from the sacred principle of religious liberty, by giving to Caesar what belongs to God, or joining together what God has put asunder, hasten to revise & purify your systems, and make the example of your Country as pure & compleat, in what relates to the freedom of the mind and its allegiance to its maker, as in what belongs to the legitimate objects of political & civil institutions.

Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history.​

 

[red states rule]

you seem to be ducking the posts on Bill Clinton campaiging in Black Churches, Barry Lynn sending spies in Churchs and then threatening them if they do not stop supporting Republcians, and no repsponse on the left's annual war on Christmas

Very telling

 

[FredVonFlash]

You need to read your own post more carefully. The government being referred to is the "national" government, not the State governments. The SOLE and ONLY purpose of the first amendment regarding religion was that the FEDERAL government would have NO SAY SO on what the States chose to do regarding if and which religion they would have State sponsored.

The 14th Amendment provides that "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." "No civil authority over religion" is probably the most obvious, and most cherished, privilege/immunity enjoyed by the citizens of the United States

 

[red states rule]

The 14th Amendment provides that "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." "No civil authority over religion" is probably the most obvious, and most cherished, privilege/immunity enjoyed by the citizens of the United States

The 14th Admendment makes abortion illegal.

 

[FredVonFlash]

I do not see any part of the government trying to impose any form of Religion on America.

A good example was Roy Moore's Commandment Monument in Alabama. Another example was the Counterfeit Christian legislator in Missouri who wanted to pass a resolution making Christianity the official religion.

However, I see libs trying to remove all references of God from the public view...trying to remove "In God We Trust" from our money

Is the duty to trust God a duty owed to God, or is it a secular matter over which Caesar has jurisdiction? Hint: See John 14:1.

 

[FredVonFlash]

Are you this fucking dense and stupid or are you just playing the role of a typical lib denying the facts and playing dumb?

I admit nothing, deny everything and I want a lawyer.

 

[red states rule]

I admit nothing, deny everything and I want a lawyer.

Call John Boy Edwards- he needs a job. If you have trouble finding him, look for a new 30,000 sq ft mansion in North Carolina.

 

[red states rule]

A good example was Roy Moore's Commandment Monument in Alabama. Another example was the Counterfeit Christian legislator in Missouri who wanted to pass a resolution making Christianity the official religion.



Is the duty to trust God a duty owed to God, or is it a secular matter over which Caesar has jurisdiction? Hint: See John 14:1.

The Courts ruled against him and if you do not like the words "In God We Trust" on the money - do not use it. Libs love to impose nothing ont he majoirty to asspease a very small minority

 

[FredVonFlash]

Then why do libs and the ACLU have a fit over Christmas?

You have presented no evidence that libs and the ACLU have fits over Christmas.

Why do they want to remove "In God We Trust" from our money?

You have not shown that the ACLU wants to remove "In God We Trust" from our money.

 

[red states rule]

You have presented no evidence that libs and the ACLU have fits over Christmas.



You have not shown that the ACLU wants to remove "In God We Trust" from our money.

ACLU VS Christmas - here is one example (I have many more)

Tis the season for the yearly tradition of the ACLU and secular attacks on Christmas. Thankfully we have groups like the ACLJ out there defending us. Jay Sekulow, of the ACLJ, writes about the latest attack from the ACLU.

The ACLU is at it again. With an outrageous boldness that only they could muster, the ACLU has, once again, set their sights on Christmas celebrations. In their never-ending quest to completely eradicate all things religious from public life, the ACLU�s latest lawsuit is an all-out frontal attack on the freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion.

Let me ask you�when did a children�s Christmas program become �an illegal activity�? When did the nativity story and Christmas songs become unconstitutional? This is the outrageous and dangerous charge the ACLU has leveled against a school district in Tennessee. A children�s Christmas program has been deemed to be an �illegal act� because of the ACLU.

This week, our senior attorneys at the American Center for Law and Justice are working on this latest ACLU case. The ACLU is absolutely determined to censor Christmas. They have sued the Wilson County School System outside of Nashville, TN. We represent several school officials and teachers who have been charged with engaging in what the ACLU calls �illegal acts.� The ACLU claims that the plaintiffs have been harmed, injured and �suffered irreparable damage� through the Christmas program because of its �Christian themes and songs.� The ACLU will then ask for these actions be declared �unconstitutional and illegal.�

It gets even worse. The plaintiffs and the ACLU allege that several kindergarten students role-played a nativity scene of the birth of Jesus�and had the audacity to sing �Away in the Manger� and �Joy to the World.� According to the ACLU, these songs are exclusively Christian in nature because they celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ and are, therefore, inappropriate. School programs that include a live nativity scene and the singing of songs like �Away in a Manger� are common throughout the United States and, indeed, around the world. Thousands of school students will be participating in similar programs this year. The ACLU has, once again, shown its desire to engage in censorship.

Of course, if the ACLU wins this case, it would set a precedent from across the nation. This is precisely why we have engaged some of our most senior lawyers to defend school officials in this important case. Make no mistake about it�the ACLU will not stop with this lawsuit. They may come to your town and target your school. Their continued attempts to loosen the threads of our religious heritage and chip away at the foundation of our freedom is never-ending.

We, at the American Center for Law and Justice, will fight for religious freedom and freedom of speech this Christmas. We are standing with the school officials in Wilson County and with concerned students and parents. We will vigorously defend the rights of these students to engage in free speech on public school campuses. We are not going to sit back and let the ACLU, the Ghost of Christmas Past, remove the joy and significance of this holiday season.

Today the American Center for Law and Justice has launched a nationwide campaign entitled �Keep HIM in Christmas.� We want to make sure that Jesus is at the center of this holiday. We want to keep HIM in the nativity scenes, keep HIM in the music, keep HIM as the focal point�and not allow the ACLU to operate as our nationwide censor.

The ACLJ have prepared resource information that clearly spells out what is permissible when it comes to expressing the religious origins of the holiday season by erecting nativity scenes in your community. At the same time, the ACLJ has prepared legal guidelines outlining the proper way for students to express their religious beliefs in school during this holiday season.

 

[FredVonFlash]

you seem to be ducking the posts on Bill Clinton campaiging in Black Churches

Show me that law that you believe was violated.

the left's annual war on Christmas

Show me the trespass by civil authority upon the things that are God's

 

[FredVonFlash]

The 14th Admendment makes abortion illegal.

How so, Geronimo?