Featured Post

The 2017 "Let Them Be For Signs" Series

I've decided to make this year's ongoing astronomical discussion an official series.  So, for your convenience, links to articles...

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

The Constitution is Fundamentally Anti-Christian

Before his assassination, Justice Scalia was discussed over at Vox Popoli just as recently as last month.  Scalia was talking at a Catholic high school in Louisiana, where he said that, basically, the Constitution of the US does not mean the state has to be neutral when it comes to religion.  

The AP article (expired IP link) sums up Justice Scalia's statement:
He told the audience at Archbishop Rummel High School that there is "no place" in the country's constitutional traditions for the idea that the state must be neutral between religion and its absence.
Vox Day backs up Justice Scalia and adds:
"Moreover, the idea that Congress shall make no law "respecting an establishment of religion" does not bar the several States, or the executive branch, from doing as it likes with regards to any religion."

"Apotheosis of Washington"  Located in Washington DC.
In the US, men--and no other--are supposed to be the gods.
 

I hold that both Justice Scalia and Vox Day are wrong in this regard.   This is one of the few times that I disagree with VD and a great man like the late Justice Scalia.  I argued as much on VD's blog thread, which I now provide below:

I'm not expert on this issue. However, after hearing Christopher Ferrara talk about his book, Liberty: The God That Failed, I honestly must disagree with both Justice Scalia and even you, Vox.

Yes, for one of only a few times in the 14-15 years I've been reading you, I think you're wrong on this.
Even the Civil War-era National Reform Association acknowledged that The Constitution was godless, and specifically, Christless. And in fact, in regards to the manner in which the Constitution is set up, it is destined to one day crush state governments and every move within the nation to hold onto Christianity.

Ferrara: "Again and again, these people in the NRA conventions warned that unless something like the Christian amendment were adopted, the Constitution would become a battering ram for the destruction of the remnants of the Christian social order.

"The appeal to the enemy is the Constitution." -T.P. Stevenson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqRo6OHdEnw

Again, this country's foundations lie on satanic Freemasonry, which is the sworn enemy of Christ's Church on Earth. And it is therefore no surprise that we have satanists popping up their weaselly heads, right here in Oklahoma, holding black masses, desecrating religious images in front of churches during Christmas, attempting to erect statues to the devil, and generally being as nasty as possible, all for the sake of spite. Belligerence for belligerence's sake.

This nation is designed to have this kind of outcome--whether that was intended or not. And because of this Freemasonic republic, we are going to see much more Satanism--and even Islam, the bride of atheists--and much less acceptance of Christianity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3zNRTDsWPo

Myself, I think we should write a new Constitution, almost exactly like that of Hungary.

Later in the conversation, I was asked by Sheila4g if I have specific incidents where any public exercise of Christianity was challenged early on? My final response in that thread was the following:

I imagine suppression of exercising Christian practices is more common these days, now that atheism is emboldened by the weakness of whatever Christian remnants are left in this country. But I do have an example or two. The first example will match our current season of the Christmas octave. (Christmas ain't over until Wednesday, the Epiphany.) Going back, you could always point to the suppression of Christmas by the Puritans. Granted, it was by a Protestant denomination, and not the State. However, Puritans were the ones in charge of local government, and prosecutions were definitely a real thing. As late as the 1800's people were prosecuted for disturbing the peace with their festivities, and tension didn't ease up until after the Civil War ended, and Christmas was made a Federal holiday.

In the early times of our country, the situation for Catholics was so tenuous, that bishops would hardly ever be appointed here. For American Catholics, back then, Catholics couldn't blatantly come out in the open so much about their faith.

The Know Nothing Party of the 1800's is responsible for a lot of harassment and destruction of Catholic property. Its most prominent leaders were U.S. Representative Nathaniel P. Banks, and Representative Lewis C. Levin. They actually started using the name the American Republican Party in 1843.
There was the Blaine Amendment of the late 1800s, which forbid direct government aid to educational institutions that have any religious affiliation. This was largely a Nativist attack against the Irish Catholic influx of that era, and it is here that we see President Grant proclaiming that--in schools at least--Church and State should be forever separate, and that religion should be left to families, churches, and private schools devoid of public funds.

Though America consists of mostly Protestants, it is arguable that the fight against Catholicism and the Logos--Jesus Christ--are wrapped up in one package. The running "joke" among Catholics is that anti-Catholicism is "the last acceptable prejudice" in this country. Historian, Professor Arthur M. Schlesinger Sr., once said: "I regard the prejudice against your Church as the deepest bias in the history of the American people."

Listen to that youtube link I provided. Christopher Ferrera gave quite a few examples of official challenges by the Founders against Christianity, proclaiming that this is NOT a Christian nation. Here it is again:

Liberty: the god That Failed - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqRo6OHdEnw

"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion--as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen--and as the said states never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
-Treaty of Tripoli, President John Adams.

Religious indifferentism implemented, once again, in order to appease the Muslims. Eat your heart out, Obama.

No comments:

Post a Comment