Freedom of religion

It took me many years to discover that the "history" I was taught in school bears little resemblance to what actually took place. I have attempted to correct that in my reading, from books offering a different slant, as well as the writings of men and women who have given me reason to trust their take on it more than what I had been taught. As with so much of what we hear and read (and "see", if you still watch TV or view snippets from YouTube), you need to develop a means of measuring the likelihood of this newer information being true.

There are questions you can ask yourself: is it logical to believe a particular fact? Cui bono - "who benefits" from accepting that history or explanation as being true? Does it seem likely that it could or would have occurred in that fashion? The story of Hannibal crossing the Italian Alps with almost forty elephants during the Punic Wars is difficult to believe for a variety of reasons: where would he get that many elephants, how would you feed and water such a herd while on the march? How would elephants fare on mountain trails where surer-footed horses and mules would need to struggle to maintain their footing? How would elephants deal with and survive the cold when their bodies were evolved (or designed, if that is your belief) for hot climates, with acres of skin giving up or taking in heat from the air around them?

In the formation of America, begun with the founding of a number of colonies on the East Coast of this country, we are told that some were founded by groups fleeing religious persecution in England and elsewhere. Considering what we have read of such persecution in England and Europe, of the many stories of the people of one religion fighting and killing those of another religion, or of people simply persecuting and killing the members of a particular religion irrespective of their own beliefs (the Jews being persecuted by those who were non-believers as well as members of other religions), it is easy to believe that some emigrated here to escape such persecution. We have seen it in this country as well, and some of us currently living have experienced it.

It is further supported by what we are seeing today. The "progressives" (aka liberals, including many Democrats) deride Christians today, calling them "bitter clingers (to the Bible and their beliefs). More and more we see the State and the courts mobilized to restrict their practices: prayer in the schools, the display of the Ten Commandments (which are displayed prominently on the walls of the Supreme Court where SCOTUS has ruled it cannot be allowed on State buildings anywhere else). We now see the man who styles himself as Barack Hussein Obama (formerly Barry Soetero) telling churches across the nation that they will be required to pay for healthcare practices that are not permitted by their beliefs.

Obama attempts - major fail - to claim that they will not be required to fund such medical and social practices such as abortion and birth control. That is a specious and deceptive (as in lying) argument. Since those organizations, such as Catholic hospitals, must pay for the insurance that will permit these procedures, they are indeed being required to pay for and support practices that run directly against their beliefs, practices they find as abhorrent as murder (and indeed believe is murder, when it pertains to aborting a living fetus). Many of them are self-insuring, which means they are directly paying for activities that are sinful and against what they are permitted by their beliefs to engage in.

The State - the Federal government - has twisted and perverted the meaning of the Constitution for many, many years, to suit its purpose of developing more complete control over the citizens of this country. We have seen the perversion of the Interstate commerce section - meant to keep individual states from interfering in each others ability to engage in such commerce, as by instituting tariffs, restrictive taxes and regulations for example, into court rulings and Executive Orders which claim that the Federal government can control every aspect of commerce - even when no commerce takes place. During the Wilson administration (IIRC), the Federal government determined that a farmer could not grow grain used solely by himself to feed himself and his livestock because it "deprived" the rest of the country of whatever benefits might accrue to his selling that grain, had he chosen to do so. So, even though NO commerce whatsoever had occurred, the Federal government decreed that it still affected commerce, and therefore came under their control.

We have seen this twisting and perversion of the words and meaning of the Constitution applied over and over again. Now the Federal government seeks to extend its control - and its abrogation of the rights of its citizens as they are listed in the Bill of Rights - to religion. Where they have already made serious inroads into the free practice of religion, under the spurious guise of "separating" church and state, now they feel comfortable and justified in forcing members of the Catholic Church to pay for things that are completely prohibited by their beliefs.

This is equivalent to forcing muslims to eat pork, sleep with dogs, or treat women with respect. Obama would never even think of requiring the muslims in this country to do those things, but has no problem forcing Catholics to do what is even more morally abhorrent - paying to end the life of a fetus. Based on current statistics, paying to end the life of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of fetuses.

Men who I respect have stated in their blogs on the Internet that they hope the Catholics and other religious people who are now speaking out against this travesty will subsequently realize that many of us have lost liberties or been forced to do things which are against our dearly-held beliefs. Kerodin, T.L. Davis, and others hope that they will realize it is similar to what the pastor Martin Niemoller spoke of after the Holocaust -

"First they came for the Jews

and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the communists
and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me -
and by then there was no one left to speak out for me.

This can certainly be applied to the attack on the various Amendments listed in the Bill of Rights. The First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Tenth have all suffered from damage done by Congress and various Presidents (of both parties). Perhaps Catholics and members of other religions will see that we all need to come together to stop the restrictions upon our liberties that government insists on fomenting.

I have openly stated, on numerous occasions, that I am not religious. I was raised as a Roman Catholic (common for those of us who are of French-Canadian descent), but became an agnostic when I was thirteen. Nonetheless, I support the rights of those who are religious to practice their faith freely - except where it harms others, as would the free practice of islam, which calls for killing those who don't accept islam and Allah. This country was formed upon Christian and Deist principles, and while it indeed permits the practice of other faiths, it should not be required to "Change" into a country that is destructive of its Christian roots. If it is important to a person to be allowed to practice islam and Sharia, move your ass to a country where it is permitted and encouraged. Don't seek to "Change" this country, or to interfere with the rights of Christians in this country to practice their faith. That includes you, Barry Soetero. Take a hike.