Congressman Randy Forbes, Founder and Co-Chair of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, recently stated
in an article, “
The First Amendment is a promise that we are free to live holistically, according to thedictates of our conscience
.” The constant barrage of assaults on our
seeks to redefine theterm and incorporate an entirely different meaning.The anti-faith voices within the country are attempting to degrade and reframe this sacred andConstitutionally protecte
d right as the, “freedom to worship in private places
.” In doing so,
thisforced compartmentalization of your and my faith is slowly, but most assuredly, eroding our Judeo-Christian heritage
. How many more steps are we really away from the edge of the precipice?From the government then controlling the very tenants of our spiritual values and practice? Firstmarginalizing and then censoring free speech? Penalizing what can be said or done in the public square
when it comes to one’s religious or core be
A far-fetched notion? Impossible in the land of the free? Yet, we need only to observe other nationsaround the globe in order to see where this insidious road could eventually lead
education camps” in communist systems—
persecution, physical threats and violence in manyMuslim countries
fear and intimidation in brutal dictatorships.
Many continue to deny this could ever happen in the United States
. However, just a few short decades ago, most citizens also never envisioned an America where the 10 Commandments would be reviled in our court houses, wherebusinesses had to accept mandatory healthcare provisions that violate the conscious or the sanctity of life, where activist outcries are made over a humble crèche in a public park at Christmastime,valedictorians having their speeches scrubbed from all religious terminology, a pastor being threatenedwith arrest for holding a Bible study in his home, military chaplains facing court martials for praying in thename of Jesus, and the list could go on.
The intent is simple and fatal: redefine the meaning of religious freedom, making it asecondary right when exercised in the public square or marketplace. If religious freedom becomes asecondary right, how will it affect you and your family? What challenges would you face if pressured tochoose between your religious convictions and your job, business or livelihood
Citizens are increasingly being forced to choose between a simple profession of faith or harshand sometimes, legal consequences.
If you are a Christian in Texas, for example, you may soon bebarred from serving on a city council simply because you expressed your biblical worldview somewhere,sometime in the public square. In San Antonio, there is currently a proposal for an upcoming non-
discrimination policy stating, “
No person shall be appointed to a position if the city council finds that such person has, prior to such proposed appointment, engaged in discrimination or demonstrated a bias, by word or deed, against any person, group or organization on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran status, age, or disability
,” the ordinance reads.
Picture yourself as a mayor
an elected leader exercising the right to share your faith by writing a column
“sprinkled” with Judeo
-Christian references, only to be threatened by an anti-faith group for it. TheFreedom From Religion Foundation has reported this particular situation
involving the mayor of Hawesville, KY
to the City Council and requested a variety of consequences for her actions, includingthe end of all prayer in government meetings.Recently,
a Christian chaplain in the military, whose specific duties are to provide religiousinstruction and spiritual counseling, is being officially censored because atheists are offended.
Chaplain Reyes recently wrote an essay on the base’s website entitled,
No Atheists in Foxholes:Chaplains Gave All in World War II
, referencing President Eisenhower’s comment of the, “great truth thatthere are no atheists in the foxholes.” Immediately, Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFR),
another attack-minded organization, contacted the base commander, demanding his article be removed.