GOD AT MILITARY ACADEMIES INVITED BACK IN
GOD AT MILITARY ACADEMIES INVITED BACK IN
J. Grant Swank, Jr.
Why not the right to pray voluntarily at military school events?
The New York-based Anti-Defamation League informed the US Naval Academy in Annapolis that prayers at mealtimes were to be shut down.
Abraham Foxman wrote the academy’s superintendent stating that mealtime petitions to the Almighty were out of step with the American way. Therefore, they should be forbidden. The chaplain should be shown the exit sign. Midshipmen should sit down to their meals with no thought of thanking the Lord for the food.
To have prayer before meals at the academy was unAmerican in that it forced those in attendance to adopt a religion. Therefore, using the worn cliché of “separation of church and state” as the baseline, League membership informed the academy that it was time to close out the traditional prayers.
Foxman said that praying was a “’stamp of approval’ on religious observance” and had no place in the academy day.
Congress Representatives Walter Jones, R-NC, and Madeleine Bordallo, D-GU, have now placed a bill before the US Congress guaranteeing military service academies the right to petition the divine at school occasions, according to Religion News Service reporter Nancy Glass of the Adventist Review.
These Representatives do not believe in the politically and religiously liberal definition of “separation of church and state.” They believe that the Judeo-Christian heritage in America permits petitions to God, in fact, encourages such prayers in the tradition of the United States history.
The Representatives believe that such League action is another attempt at totally secularizing America, like unto the present-tense godlessness in the European Union constitution. Secularization is not in the best interest of America, the Representatives and their supporters state to the media.
FOOTNOTE: THE TRUTH ABOUT ‘SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE’
Liberals have run off with this phrase, prostituting it per usual.
The matter is simple. It’s this: America does not want a state church. England has a state church — the Anglican Church. America does not want one denomination considered The Nation’s Church.
On the other hand, America has a religious heritage. It’s not Muslim. It’s not Hindu. It’s not Shinto. It’s not animism. It’s not New Age. It’s not Paganism. It’s not Voodoo. It’s Judeo-Christian.
America, while not desiring a state church, does desire religion in life. That includes religious expression in everyday exchange. Because Judeo-Christian is America’s heritage, most citizens honor that heritage expressed and honored. Its expression then should not be thwarted. It should not be belittled. It should not be erased in the name of “separation of church and state.”
Unhampered religious expression is promised in the First Amendment.
Further, America, having a Judeo-Christian heritage and the right to present-tense expression, permits freedom of religious expression to other religions. Therefore, there are those of other religious persuasions who practice without fear their religions in America.
What the liberals want to do is redefine the phrase “separation of church and state” to exclude Judeo-Christian religious expression in America. They want not only “separation of church and state” defined on their terms but the exclusion of the Judeo-Christian religion and anything coming close to that particular religious expression—period.
Liberals believe that if they continue harping on the “separation of church and state” phrase, brainwashing the public with their prostituted definition, especially indoctrinating the next generation with their prostituted definition, then they will have won secularism for America’s future.
They, in other words, want not only separation but exclusion of religion — completely so. Note however that the chief religion they want excluded is Judeo-Christian.
They will even tolerate other religions, as they are presently doing with the Muslim infiltration, but it is Judeo-Christian that they want cleansed from America. In other words, it’s a religious cleansing they desire for this nation — the extinguishing specifically of the Judeo-Christian faith.
Therefore, if tolerating another religion such as Islam helps wipe out Judeo-Christianity, then so be it. Islam is far better a tolerance than the American heritage of Judeo-Christian. Therefore, there are school districts hiring Muslims to speak to teachers on how to give Muslim students honor and space. No such invitation, of course, has been extended to Judeo-Christian specialists speaking to public school educators on how to give Judeo-Christian adherents honor and space.
In a nearby high school, a prayer room was set aside for Muslim students. No such prayer room or any other respect has been presented those of the Judeo-Christian heritage.
Liberals, in other words, will do whatever it takes to obliterate America of its rightful Judeo-Christian heritage. This is accented every year particularly during the Christmas season. Any other so-called “religious expression” can come to the fore but the Christian particulars must be silenced at all costs. So we hear throughout the Christmas season, not Christian hymn carols, but “separation of church and state.”
Once again, liberals have taken language to serve their own twisted purposes. They took “homosexual” and made it “gay.” They took “pro-choice” and made it “protecting females.” They take “separation of church and state” and make it “wiping out America’s Judeo-Christian heritage.”
What those of the Judeo-Christian heritage must do — and far more concertedly than they have ever done in the past — is to make clear to the public what “separation of church and state” really means. This must be put in print in magazines and journals. It must be preached from pulpits. It must be taught in religion classes. It must be spelled out in letters to the editor.
Unfortunately, this simply has not been done. The church in particular has permitted the liberals to carry on with their prostitution of the phrase. I have been appalled over the years to note that the church specifically has not risen to expose the liberals’ misuse of that phrase. Therefore, the young have taken quickly to the liberals’ definition while the church has sat, in the main, silent, allowing the enemy to win out.
J. Grant Swank, Jr.
Why not the right to pray voluntarily at military school events?
The New York-based Anti-Defamation League informed the US Naval Academy in Annapolis that prayers at mealtimes were to be shut down.
Abraham Foxman wrote the academy’s superintendent stating that mealtime petitions to the Almighty were out of step with the American way. Therefore, they should be forbidden. The chaplain should be shown the exit sign. Midshipmen should sit down to their meals with no thought of thanking the Lord for the food.
To have prayer before meals at the academy was unAmerican in that it forced those in attendance to adopt a religion. Therefore, using the worn cliché of “separation of church and state” as the baseline, League membership informed the academy that it was time to close out the traditional prayers.
Foxman said that praying was a “’stamp of approval’ on religious observance” and had no place in the academy day.
Congress Representatives Walter Jones, R-NC, and Madeleine Bordallo, D-GU, have now placed a bill before the US Congress guaranteeing military service academies the right to petition the divine at school occasions, according to Religion News Service reporter Nancy Glass of the Adventist Review.
These Representatives do not believe in the politically and religiously liberal definition of “separation of church and state.” They believe that the Judeo-Christian heritage in America permits petitions to God, in fact, encourages such prayers in the tradition of the United States history.
The Representatives believe that such League action is another attempt at totally secularizing America, like unto the present-tense godlessness in the European Union constitution. Secularization is not in the best interest of America, the Representatives and their supporters state to the media.
FOOTNOTE: THE TRUTH ABOUT ‘SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE’
Liberals have run off with this phrase, prostituting it per usual.
The matter is simple. It’s this: America does not want a state church. England has a state church — the Anglican Church. America does not want one denomination considered The Nation’s Church.
On the other hand, America has a religious heritage. It’s not Muslim. It’s not Hindu. It’s not Shinto. It’s not animism. It’s not New Age. It’s not Paganism. It’s not Voodoo. It’s Judeo-Christian.
America, while not desiring a state church, does desire religion in life. That includes religious expression in everyday exchange. Because Judeo-Christian is America’s heritage, most citizens honor that heritage expressed and honored. Its expression then should not be thwarted. It should not be belittled. It should not be erased in the name of “separation of church and state.”
Unhampered religious expression is promised in the First Amendment.
Further, America, having a Judeo-Christian heritage and the right to present-tense expression, permits freedom of religious expression to other religions. Therefore, there are those of other religious persuasions who practice without fear their religions in America.
What the liberals want to do is redefine the phrase “separation of church and state” to exclude Judeo-Christian religious expression in America. They want not only “separation of church and state” defined on their terms but the exclusion of the Judeo-Christian religion and anything coming close to that particular religious expression—period.
Liberals believe that if they continue harping on the “separation of church and state” phrase, brainwashing the public with their prostituted definition, especially indoctrinating the next generation with their prostituted definition, then they will have won secularism for America’s future.
They, in other words, want not only separation but exclusion of religion — completely so. Note however that the chief religion they want excluded is Judeo-Christian.
They will even tolerate other religions, as they are presently doing with the Muslim infiltration, but it is Judeo-Christian that they want cleansed from America. In other words, it’s a religious cleansing they desire for this nation — the extinguishing specifically of the Judeo-Christian faith.
Therefore, if tolerating another religion such as Islam helps wipe out Judeo-Christianity, then so be it. Islam is far better a tolerance than the American heritage of Judeo-Christian. Therefore, there are school districts hiring Muslims to speak to teachers on how to give Muslim students honor and space. No such invitation, of course, has been extended to Judeo-Christian specialists speaking to public school educators on how to give Judeo-Christian adherents honor and space.
In a nearby high school, a prayer room was set aside for Muslim students. No such prayer room or any other respect has been presented those of the Judeo-Christian heritage.
Liberals, in other words, will do whatever it takes to obliterate America of its rightful Judeo-Christian heritage. This is accented every year particularly during the Christmas season. Any other so-called “religious expression” can come to the fore but the Christian particulars must be silenced at all costs. So we hear throughout the Christmas season, not Christian hymn carols, but “separation of church and state.”
Once again, liberals have taken language to serve their own twisted purposes. They took “homosexual” and made it “gay.” They took “pro-choice” and made it “protecting females.” They take “separation of church and state” and make it “wiping out America’s Judeo-Christian heritage.”
What those of the Judeo-Christian heritage must do — and far more concertedly than they have ever done in the past — is to make clear to the public what “separation of church and state” really means. This must be put in print in magazines and journals. It must be preached from pulpits. It must be taught in religion classes. It must be spelled out in letters to the editor.
Unfortunately, this simply has not been done. The church in particular has permitted the liberals to carry on with their prostitution of the phrase. I have been appalled over the years to note that the church specifically has not risen to expose the liberals’ misuse of that phrase. Therefore, the young have taken quickly to the liberals’ definition while the church has sat, in the main, silent, allowing the enemy to win out.
<< Home