The first amendment to the Constitution states; Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or
the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government
for a redress of grievances. We have
allowed the Federal Government to breach this amendment to the point where, in
the eyes of many, this government has replaced God.
It begins with a lure of money in
the form of grants and subsidies. For
example, schools districts were among the first to succumb to this tactic. The government offered them grants (like
Title I funds) that have strings attached.
The school districts has to use those funds as the government dictates
they have to in order to keep the funds coming.
Then the Supreme Court ruled that
if the school district was receiving funds of any kind from the Federal
Government, then they were an extension of Congress and therefore were under
the same rules, i.e. they could “make no laws respecting an establishment of
religion”. So, prayer and the ten
commandments were removed from the schools because it was an “establishment of
religion”. However, the Supreme Court forgot
that by the same logic they used to state that the schools were an extension of
Congress, that they too were likewise an extension of Congress and could make
no law respecting an establishment of religion.
By making it illegal for schools to have prayer or the Ten Commandments
in their buildings, they were making laws respecting an establishment of
religion, namely Secular Humanism.
Now consider the issue of marriage.
Marriage is a religious ordinance. It has always been an ordinance of religious
orders no matter which sect of religion it is performed in. The Supreme Court is now about to rule on marriage
for the homosexual factions of our society.
This is another violation of the first amendment. They are deciding whether homosexual marriage
is constitutional or not.
Under their own definition of what is under
the umbrella of “Congress” the Supreme Court cannot make any ruling regarding
the establishment of religion, therefore, they cannot declare homosexual
marriage constitutional. They can
establish that civil unions between homosexuals are constitutional because that
is not a religious ordinance, but secular one.
It can say that any entitlement of a civil union also applies to those
homosexuals that enter into that civil union, but it has no constitutional
authority to declare that homosexuals are entitled to a religious union called “marriage”.
This makes it our responsibility to
oppose any court decision that declares that homosexual “marriage” is valid
under the Constitution. If the court
decides that homosexuals may be united, under civil law then so be it, they
have the right to do so because that is not a religious ordinance, however,
they cannot rule that religious organizations who refuse to perform homosexual
marriages are in violation of the constitutional rights of homosexuals. If they do, then the court itself is in
violation of the first amendment because they are establishing a law respecting
the establishment of religion.
On the other hand, are we no longer
subject to the Constitution of the United States and all the actions of
Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President having the semblance of acts
that abide by the Constitution and are a façade and a sham? What say you?
