One N.C. pastor is taking steps to organize a national “coming out” of what we’ve all known for a long time anyway. He’s erected a flagpole outside his Elizabeth Baptist church, in Shelby, specifically to raise “two flags” to make a point and launch a campaign on behalf of all the “persecuted” Christians out there. The point, he says, is symbolic, and “consistent with our founding documents”: Pastor Rit Varriale is illegally flying the Christian flag above the U.S. flag, and he wants the rest of America to do the same.
It’s nice to have things out in the open and all the cards on the proverbial table, isn’t it?
We all knew Christians obviously follow their god first and foremost. After all, if you truly believe in that sort of thing, that only makes sense. Wouldn’t you be more inclined to follow God than the president? One is all-knowing, all-powerful, filled with an itchy smiting finger. The other is a man elected to allegedly run the country in the best interests of the people. So it makes sense, and it’s good to see them not only admit it, but hang handy flags out front so we know where allegiance to equality, law, justice, and country runs into static. Varriale calls the current, legal arrangement of flags “completely improper,” however, and has other ideas.
But, because the U.S. Flag Code says no flag shall fly above the U.S. flag, the organization Varriale has formed around and behind this action, God Before Government, can safely be referred to as a criminal organization, and one he is hoping will catch on across the entire nation — with himself at the helm, naturally. Check out the organization’s rallying statement, below:
In Varriale’s eyes, his suggestion for the positioning of the flags is “a symbol that we’ll serve God before we serve government, especially a government that tries to coerce us to violate our commitments to God.”
As evidence for his logic, Varriale points toward the Pledge of Allegiance. He asks, it’s “One nation –what? – under God.”
But as Jon Green wrote for americablog.com:
Of course, no one is forcing Pastor Varriale to violate his religious beliefs by presiding over a gay wedding. And, of course, our national motto – while not carrying anything resembling the force of law – has only included reference to God since 1954. As in, when Frances Bellamy wrote the original in 1892, he didn’t consider it at all religious.
Not surprisingly at all, Varriale’s actions come about as a knee-jerk reaction against the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in favor of marriage equality. But thanks to his national call for folks to break the law in the name of “Christian persecution,” until we are actually able to mature enough as a society to embrace our LGBTQ family and brethren, folks will at least know where the bigots hang.
Now, everyone will know where these hot spots of anti-LGBTQ rights, anti-women’s rights, bigotry and prejudice are. Folks expecting a free, tolerant country based in justice and equality, as the “founding” documents also play at, can take care to step around such hot spots demarcated by their Christian flags radiating above the waving stars and stripes of Old Glory like shoes on a telephone wire.
Of course, you didn’t need a flag waving outside to tell you that, though, did you?
Featured image via YouTube screen capture
Dude, you swear on a Bible to uphold the Constitution, not the other way around.
I don’t swear on any bible for anything.
Neither do I, but when taking the oath of office, lawmakers in NC do.
Largely out of “tradition” and to keep it cool with constituents. I would swear on the Constitution to uphold the Constitution.
I would simply *affirm* (something the Constitution allows), because Matthew 5.33-37. 😉
Affirm means to state as a fact; assert strongly and publicly.
Since I don’t believe any of the bible, the wording for Matthew 5:33-37 implies things that exist that I don’t.
So would I. But I think it’s worth pointing out that no secular lawmaker ever is asked to swear to uphold the Bible.
They’re not required to swear on the bible, but it doesn’t do well with some people who assume one has to be a Christian to serve in public office.
Tax the bastards… they’ll run and hide
Wow. I’ve read headlines from just about every credible news source operating on a national level in the country, and can’t find a single one who will back up your claims. And to be frank, the reason for that is very simple. You’re wrong. Completely, in fact. First of all, the National Flag Code states directly that
“No other flag or pennant should be placed above or, if on then
same level, to the
right of the flag of the United States of America, except during church services
conducted by naval chaplains at sea, when
the church pennant may be flown
above the flag during church services for the personnel of the navy.”. Now, the pastor mentioned above is not a service chaplain, and the people who attend his church, are, for the most part, not naval servicemen. But that doesn’t actually matter, because like most legal code, it leaves room for interpretation by lack of precedent. So calling any of this pastor’s actions is a stretch, if not downright wrong.
Furthermore, you should really take a class in objectivity. Throughout your rant you’ve engaged in exaggeration, unfounded statements, and even downright libel. You seem to have forgotten that our nation was founded on the principles of personal and religious freedom, specifically for Protestant Christians. There’s a reason we swear on the Bible in court, a reason we say “one nation under god” when we repeat the pledge of allegiance. To put it simply, the purpose of this country’s very existence was to unite a series of separate states under the single most powerful being in existence- namely, God.
You definitely need to read the words of the founding fathers. No where is God mentioned or referred to in the Declaration of Independence or Constitution. There is a reason for this. Find out.
Oh my God. Seriously? They never mentioned God in the declaration of Independence? Amazing! I wonder who they were referring to when they said the exact words:
“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people
to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another,
and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal
station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a
decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should
declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
And gee. i wonder what Creator the Christian James Madison was referring to when he wrote:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-That
to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving
their just powers from the consent of the governed, -That whenever any
Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of
the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in
such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and
Happiness.”
And ir, as you so untruthfully claim, the Declaration of Independence never mentions God in any way, shape or form, what exactly would warrant the numerous references to Him in this single sentence:
” And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the
protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our
Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”
Still confused? Let me clear it up for you.
Divine, as defined by the dictionary, means “of, from, or like God or a god.”
or “devoted to God; sacred”
Hmm….sacred. Where have I heard that before? Could it have been at the tail end of that same sentence, directly excerpted from the Declaration of Independence?
Well, since you insist that the constitution never mentioned or referred to God in any way, I guess i must be mistaken about the word’s definition. Let’s consult the dictionary, shall we?
Sacred- ” connected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration”
Or- ” religious rather than secular”
Given that one of the word’s own definitions is “not secular”, it’s kind of hard to imagine someone using this in any context not at least somewhat related to religion.
Now, all of these very clear mentions of God are made by Christians, to the Christian God, in the Declaration of Independence.
Now let’s take a look at the Constitution, because that’s your last shot at not being proven ENTIRELY wrong just yet.
Now as the Constitution is a legal document, set out for the purpose of maintaining the proper function of law and government, it would be completely possible to avoid including any mentions, allusions, or references to God whatsoever. But the founding fathers still threw in a few.
First, the preamble:”We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more
perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility,
provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare,
and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,
do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States
of America.”
Now you may not have caught this one, but the key word here is BLESSING.
Because in order for anything to be considered a blessing, it cannot just simply fall into your lap. It must be bestowed on the receiver, by someone who has the power and will to do so. And who has the power and will to bestow liberty and freedom on a human? Certainly not King George.
And finally, the moment you’ve all been waiting for: the clearest, most obvious reference to God ever mentioned in American founding documents: The last sentence of the Constitution. it reads as follows: “done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present
the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one
thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence
of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof
We have hereunto subscribed our Names”
Let’s try this one at a time without the windbag effect. “The laws of NATURE, and of NATURES God”,… is that how you refer to your god? Is natures god the same god as a Christians god? Is it because of the word “god” that makes it christian? What about the Norse gods or the Roman or Hindu gods? Because of that word “god” are they actually Christian also?
Let’s look at “divine providence”. You claim “divine” means god like but in this context it is being used as a verb for the subject providence and the verbal meaning of the word is,..”to discover or declare (something obscure or in the future) by divination; prophesy”. No god here.
Here are those excluded definitions for “sacred”,…
“.4.
reverently dedicated to some person, purpose, or object:
a morning hour sacred to study.
5.
regarded with reverence:
the sacred memory of a dead hero.
6.
secured against violation, infringement, etc., as by reverence or sense of right:
sacred oaths; sacred rights.
7.
properly immune from violence, interference, etc., as a person or office.
You say blessings can only come from a god,… really?
1
a : the act or words of one that blesses
b : approval, encouragement
2
: a thing conducive to happiness or welfare
3
: grace said at a meal
Where is a god in those definitions?
And finally about the date. You do understand that year of our lord is in reference to the date only and that “our lord” is not the same thing to many as “THE Lord”. Thomas Jefferson firmly believed in the man Jesus Christ and his teachings but did not believe he was God and rewrote the bible to reflect that. It’s known as “The Jefferson Bible”
Our founding fathers were enlightened and educated men. Had they wished to refer to a supreme being called God they would have in plain language. Instead here you are trying to make their words mean something different because of your personal belief. Simply put you are being dishonest taking words out of context and assigning them your own meanings.
First of all, when any Christian refers to God, given that as a Christian they believe in the Christian God,and only in HIm it can be safely assumed that they are referring to the God of Christianity. IF they choose to refer to Him as nature’s God, that doesn’t matter in the slightest. The only God they believe in is the God of Christianity, who, according to the doctrine they believe, created nature. So yes, He would literally be Nature’s God, along with Humanity’s God, the God of Wisdom, The way, the truth and the light, the Creator, The Almighty, and any of the other various names mentioned both in this document and in various other documents and works.
And as for the definitions, LOOK THEM UP. I don’t “claim” that’s what the definition is. I quoted it all, verbatim, directly from a dictionary. The same goes for the numerous mentions of God and our Lord in both the Constitution and Declaration.
The phrase The Year of Our Lord, instituted by the Roman Catholic Church, refers specifically to the year designated as the birthyear of Jesus Christ, the CHRISTIAN MESSIAH. so yes, the year of our Lord means EXACTLY the same thing as the year of the Lord. I have not in any way attempted to make their words mean something different from what they were intended to be. I have directly quoted the words of the founding fathers, which may be found easily through examination of the documents, and which clearly mention a belief in the Christian God. You consistently ignore the fact that most of both the founding fathers, and America at large, held a belief in God clearly observable by even the most casual observer of their works.
Why are you lying so blatantly? I did look things up and gave you those definitions, which you ignored, from the dictionary itself,.. probably the same dictionary you used. You must have read it if you read my post. A lie through omission is still a lie. And a Christian lying isn’t being very Christ-like is he?
Our founding fathers were NOT the Christians you and others like you have decided they were. They were what is known as “enlightened”. They had come from a world ruled by religion and didn’t want religion ruling the new world. They were “deists”,… “Deism is a belief in a diety or god based on observance of NATURAL LAWS (get it? Natures god!) and phenomena, while simultaneously rejecting miracles, divine revelation, and prophecy of all kinds, including the idea of inerrant scriptures or holy books.” Not once but twice did Thomas Jefferson sit down with copies of the KJ bible and a knife and he cut out EVERY passage which referred to god, miracles, and ALL other supernatural happenings described in that book. He did not believe Jesus was the son of god but very much believed in his message of love He wrote often how he considered himself the ONLY TRUE Christian because he followed the man and not the god.
“The year of our lord” was the proper way of writing the date. Hundreds of years after his execution,.. even though the world had been in existence for thousands of years, a superstitious Roman council decided to make the day Jesus was killed as day one. You take the word lord to mean “god” but it is coming from a time when “My Lord” or “My Lady” was the proper way to address a person. And if you respected a person enough to follow his words then you most likely would address that person as “My Lord” without considering that person to be a god.
Now something you will truly dislike. Jesus was an observing Jew. He had a disdain for non-Jews and compared non-Jews, known as “gentiles”, to dogs. His messages, like love thy neighbor, was not for you but rather for other Jews and he told them NOT to share those messages with you. He was upset with the way his religion was being observed and wanted the people to return to the laws of Moses. For 2000 and 15 years he has been rolling in his grave over what people like you have done to his legacy. He would not be happy with the way the religion he loved has been bastardized using his name.
You are a liar…but I’m sure you’ve been told this before.
HA! You’re funny ,kid. Would you like to put some actual fact behind your name-calling or are you just here to make yourself feel superior?
While I agree with some of your analysis, you become unhinged at the end and assert utter nonsense. The purpose of our country was not to unite separate states under God. If you think that, you are truly a simpleton and utterly ignorant of history.
“specifically for Protestant Christians” my left arm.
If you would take the time to actually read what I wrote, You might realize that you’re arguing a point I’ve already shown to be futile.
You failed Government class, didn’t you?
Nope.
Haha! You need a refresher course then.
Now are you going to say anything intelligent or keep slinging unfounded insults?
I’ll keep slinging insults because I have a feeling that’s the only thing you fully comprehend. K.I.S.S (keep it simple, stupid)
This GOD fella you are talking about we have warrent for his arrestt if we can not find him we will be forced to arrest you instead ,,,I URGE YOU to have him turn himself in so you are not arrested in his plase,,,,,,,
You know so little about the history of our country, and of the founding documents, that you are unfit to be a leader of any church. And, do you think so much of your Christianity that you ignore the Bible? Do the women of your church wear headscarves? Are they allowed to sing hymns? Are you choosing to be more holy than Jesus, who said nothing about homosexuals? Fall back on Leviticus only you’ve never eaten pork, worn mixed fibers or any of the other 73 forbidden things. Go to the New Testament and women need to shut up in church and wear a headscarf as the Muslim women do. 1 Corinthians 11:6 For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head. 1 Corinthians 14:34 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.
I think you’re misinterpreting the purpose of the Bible, friend. It’s a Hebrew Narrative meant for the sole purpose of cataloging events that occurred in the history of Christianity and Abrahamic beliefs. That doesn’t mean Christians condone everything that happened. Just because someone did something immoral in history doesn’t mean that it should be omitted from all memoirs and records.(although it’s not like atheists haven’t tried, ever heard of Li SI?) The simple fact of it is, The Bible was recorded by people who lived at the time and wished to record what they knew for posterity. Many of the authors actually witnessed the events they recorded themselves. And the book has tremendous historical value, even to an atheist. We don’t ignore the Bhagavad-Gita or Rig Veda simply because we don’t believe in Brahma. We don’t ignore the Epic of Gilgamesh because the walls of Ur no longer stand and humans no longer revere the name Ishtar. We take it for what we can understand of it. So regardless of the existence of God, the bible retains its purpose a historical document. It’s a history. Not a guide. Now, if you’d like to sling mud at the reasons behind Christianity or the church’s various practices, you are of course free to do so. I’ll wait here to explain exactly why you’re wrong.
Don’t hold yer breath.
i agree. Typically when people are wrong they refuse to continue the argument by themselves and rely on a system of tagteaming wherin they run away and let others take over, so you’re right. That guy probably isn’t coming back.
Get over yourself. Because you don’t get an immediate response means people have a life which doesn’t revolve around you. And because somebody else on a social network has an opinion about the conversation taking place and states it does not make that “tag teaming”.That’s called a discussion.
Not one single passage in the bible was actually written by the person credited for it nor did those people who wrote those passages personally know ANY of the people they wrote about,…It was ALL passed down stories, sometimes re-using previous stories with all the names changed. Saul,.. who changed his name to Paul because as Saul he had been known as a brutal murdering zealot NEVER met Jesus, yet is accredited for most of the first hand accounts written about him. He was brought before Jesus’ brother James 3 times and recanted the stories he had made up each time, only to continue to tell them to the Roman audience he was addressing. All this Christian nonsense would have ended had he been stoned to death for blaspheme as was about to happen to him on that third visit to James when the Roman soldiers, thinking he was somebody else, saved him by sending him to Rome for trial. Peter, who Christians changed from Jewish to Christian by calling him the first Bishop was actually in Rome as a Jewish Rabbi making certain Jews held to their faith. Pauls stories were believed by the pagans who had no problem believing in gods, and magic, and stories of miracles and the supernatural. Peters upside down crucifixion was a direct anti-Christian statement.
It’s a waste of breath. They know almost nothing about the history of their own religion or the Bible. And don’t want to, it would be embarrassing to have what they believe refuted by fact.
Well, you can’t really blame them. The Judeo- Christian- Muslim religion is completely based on blind obedience. Often they are taught not to question the dogma at a very early age and that kind of brainwashing is extremely hard to overcome. The fantasy of ever lasting life is far more attractive than the thought of death being the end and so it gives the religious people a feeling of superiority, which they desperately need since they are running entirely on a hope that what they were told is true.
Wrong again. I do indeed have a life. I also live in a completely different timezone on a different continent. My hours.
“Many of the authors actually witnessed the events they recorded themselves.”
Can’t think of any except for some epistles. None of the Old Testament is a contemporary record and little of the New.
And I think you are misinterpreting the purpose of the various books that make up the Bible. Even those that are in some sense historical (e.g. King lists) are recorded to serve a religious purpose.
And, of course, it is exactly that something has Biblical precedent that it’s been used by Christians to justify vile behaviour, from slavery to wife beating.
Ok, i can see I’m going to have to repeat myself a lot here, because apparently it didn’t get through to you the first time. OF COURSE the Bible is recorded with religious affiliation. It’s the main text of the largest religion in the world. That in no way diminishes my point. The epic of Gilgamesh and Rig Veda are also religious. I actually made that exact point right up there ^^^. But that does not change the fact that they are records of actual events that were believed to have happened by the people who wrote them. And in the case of first-person accounts, such as every book or passage recorded by an apostle, it’s difficult to get it wrong.
Now as to the rest of what you said, as a historical narrative, it RECORDS WHAT HAPPENED, not just the stuff that they think was ok. I believe I already clearly stated that. Using the excuse that something happened in the Bible as a reason for saying Christians condone it is the same as taking any literary work that mentions Hitler and saying the author approved of genocide.
You don’t need to repeat it, I got it when you were wrong the first time.
It is not that they are simply based in religion, they are exclusively religious propaganda. They exist to push a view, not record actual events.
For the most part the writers of the various biblical books have NO interest in history, they are telling religious stories with a religious intent. Mostly there is NO evidence they are reporting actual true events and certainly not contemporaneously.. They may be based on real events, but they are NOT histories and are NOT contemporary.
As I said the only first hand events in the Bible are arguable the Epistles. There is no evidence to suggest that there is any single piece surviving written by an apostle.
The Bible is NOT in any sense a history.
And you have, again misinterpreted - I suspect deliberately - what I said. I didn’t say that something being in the Bible means Christians condone it, I said that some Christians use the presence of something in the Bible as an excuse to condone it, however unpleasant. A totally different meaning.
If the Bible has no interest in recording history, then it would not use real people such as Jesus in its message, as doing so would allow anyone who knew those people to easily condemn the reports as false. As to Jesus’s existence, even atheist historians will affirm that he was a real person. Scholars of multiple faiths and lack thereof have affirmed key events in his life, specifically, his baptism and crucifixion. Anyone wishing to question that fact can turn to any credible historical source and return with a resounding affirmation that Jesus the Nazarean, whether you believe he was the Christ or not, did, in fact, walk on this earth.
Now if you were alive back in those days, and you were with Jesusat any point throughout his life, as so many were, why would you lie? Jesus, the affirmatively real person, claimed to have performed miracles in front of crowds and groups ranging anywhere from 2 to 200 people. Every person present at one such miracle affirmed that the miracle occurred. Some were willing to die for that fact. So why would they lie? It is decidedly insane to allow yourself to be killed for belief in something that you know is not true. So what about Jesus? Before he died, he had ample opportunity to confess that he was a liar and be spared. If it was all just a scam, as so many atheists claim, why would he die for it?
People during this period in time had a firm belief in magic, but it’s practice could be a stoning offense according to the Jewish law. Still, there were many “miracle makers” and healers who did many of the same things Jesus did,.. the difference being that they charged for it and Jesus did not. That is why his crowds were so large. It also helped cement the image of him championing the poor. There is no report of Jesus having this ability until after his stay with John the Baptist,.. but then being a mostly illiterate area and time, nobody was writing down first hand accounts of anything with the exception of certain Roman records. And that is the only place we find the name Jesus,… one entry with that name and nothing else written about that meeting at that time.
1. The Bible names 3237 people. Same certainly real, some possibly and many probably not.
2. Please can you stop talking about the Bible as if it’s a single artefact. It’s a library of disparate books.
3. Jesus’ existence is moot. Most believe there was a real person behind the stories and that’s about it. There is not one single external piece of verification for his existence, life or the circumstances of his death. Not one.
4. How could any scholar anywhere affirm anything about Jesus’ life? They don’t. Because apart from the conflicting stories about him written in the first century after his death by Christian polemicists - who’d never met him in life - there is not one joy of evidence for any of it.
5. “Anyone wishing to question that fact can turn to any credible historical source”. Name me one single extra-Biblical source of any kind.
6. Isn’t it interesting that out of all those large crowds (BTW the Bible has them as much larger - remember the feeding of the 5000?) not one single person who met Jesus in life left any written record, nor did any one at the time who wasn’t involved make any mention of it anywhere.
7. You have a very strange idea of what happened to the Jerusalem Church after Jesus’ death.
8. You,I nor anyone else knows the actual circumstances of Jesus death or his beliefs. But they were almost certainly not what you think they were. You might note there were a lot of Jewish Messianic movements in that century centred around other ‘saviours’ and people died for them. Jesus didn’t have to be a liar (even assume we have any idea what he believed, and we pretty much are guessing) he just had to be wrong.
That Jefferson dude clearly had too little god in his life.
“Christianity neither is, nor ever was part of the common law”
“In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty.”
Stupid founding father… 😉
Well he is now going to get the persecution that he so ridiculously sees and desires, and he has it coming.
“christains” today are nothing more than a pack of lying, violent, hypocritical, Biblically ignorant savages. I once had a small amount of respect for these people. No longer.
Careful now, buddy. You keep up this much libel and my feelings might start to get hurt.
Hey, many of these pseudo Christians think they know better than God. Why wouldn’t they know more than the government they want replaced with Theocracy? Guess they love the way it’s working in the Middle East. Idiots! Case closed.
There is no “God”. Case closed.
I vote for a change to the song. Maybe back to pre-1954?
On church ground, the pastor can do what he wants. Of course, he should recognize that on state ground, such an action would be impermissible. As for the flag code, it is true that federal law makes criminal certain actions in relation to the US flag. On the other hand, it is well established by the Supreme Court that freedom of speech (expression) trumps that, in that flag burning was deemed a constitutionally protected right. If we add freedom of religion into the mix, I hardly think the pastor is threatened with any form of legal sanction.
How is it that Christians like Pastor Varriale are SO CONVINCED that God spoke out against homosexuality, and yet so UNconvinced that God spoke out with equal fervor (at least, according to Scripture) in favor of stoning adulterers to death, in favor of stoning to death non-virgins seeking to get married, and He pronounced judgment on any one of a number of OTHER activities decreed (in Scripture) to be “abominations”?
How is it that the supposed “abomination” of homosexuality is held up to the light with such vigor while practically ALL the other “abominations” are steadfastly ignored? Remember, in Scripture, they’re all labeled “abominations”, so there does not seem to be any sense of priority about which abomination is worse than, or not so bad as, any other abomination.
Usual Xian Sharia nonsense.
Is that a cell phone or heat the guy’s packing?
Pastor needs to read his bible. It says obey the government for it is put there by God.
Romans 13 New International Version (NIV)
Submission to Governing Authorities
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.
6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
It’s a free country and on private property he can do what he wants. As an atheist, I don’t care what other people believe. I just don’t want those beliefs to interfere with anyone who does not believe and i don’t want the government to support those beliefs. Atheists would go away and live their life in peace if religious people kept their beliefs out of public law or public ceremony. Public means all people and many of the all people do not have those same beliefs.
I would not swear on a bible because I don’t hold the bible to be of any significant importance. It is a just-out-of-stone-age book that described life back when no one had rights but males. I would swear on the constitution. I would like the pledge put back to the original author’s intent, without under god. I would like the motto returned to what it was e pluribus unum (out of many, one) instead of In god we trust. I would like laws abortion and marriage to be based on civil code and not religious doctrine. If you are against abortion or gay marriage, don’t have one. Stop public prayer for government functions unless you allow all other beliefs/non-beliefs the opportunity to participate.
If you are a public servant like a clerk or judge, you need to hang your religious beliefs at the door and only act based on the law of the land. If you can’t you need to resign.
If you want to dance with snake, speak in tongues, have a revival, believe in magic underwear, make voodoo dolls, smoke pot, do peyote, believe in kolob or Xenu, whatever your religious beliefs call for short of torture or killing people or animals, then go for it, on your private property.
I reserve the right to laugh at you and tell jokes about it, but not to stop it.
I could not have said it better. Thanks.
we have been hammered with isis, now let us think up a creative name for these zealots, Christian state, they fly their flag just like isis, they want to be considered extremists who server allah over the government of the united states, so be it, they are clearly drawing a clear comparison to is, you say they do not slit throats, what of the abortion doctors slain, what of the abuse of women and children at their hand, zealots gotta have zeal
Call them “CRISIS.”
If what you want is to live in a country let me make the following suggestion and then you go and come back and tell me how that works for you when you are told how to live, when to worship and what God to worship or die for not doing so. This nation was founded by people fleeing religious persecution. It was founded so they could be free to practice any religion they chose or chose not to. This nation was NOT founded as a Christian nation. If you choose to live by your Bible that’s fine but you do not have the right to force others to live by any Bible from any religion.
Flying the Christian flag above the American flag to show disapproval of the government would be free speech under the Constitution and the Supreme Court has already ruled that the use of the flag in free speech trumps the flag code in the law and any etiquette it tries to put worth.
1 Peter 2:12-14New International Version (NIV)
12 Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.
13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, 14 or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. (Read Goverment)
New International Version (NIV) | I think he forgot this part of his bible…
Please join ISIS and fly your flag high.
My favourite scripture for this kind of individual is Romans 13:1-6 the gist of which is that Christians are to subject themselves to the authorities placed over them by God, this is their buybull not mine.
By doing this utterly contemptible action, they’re acting both criminally and against their own holey book.