U.S. Church Official: 'The Day May Come When We Have to Resist'

[ReConverted]

Yes, exactly. The State is moving towards a completely defined set of secular values, including “marriage equality,” abortion and birth control “rights.” To not adhere to this set of values is to oppose society. The right to practice religious values is being curtailed, inch by inch. It took a legal battle all the way to the Supreme Court to allow US citizens who are Christians and oppose abortive birth control to conduct themselves in accordance with the demands of their faith and conscience. Congress then attempted to write in laws that would circumvent the Supreme Court decision. If you don’t think Christians are in a battle here, you’re on another planet. These secularists have the commitment, small-mindedness and ferocity of Puritans. They’ll be whipping us down the street (uh, or firing us from our jobs) any day now…

Oh, please. Marriage equality doesn’t hurt my straight marriage one bit. Whose religious values are we talking about? Last time I checked, I still live in the United States of America. Abortive birth control, my foot. The SCOTUS deicision says religious people can discriminate based on what they think is true, even if the science (A dirty word to some) has clearly demonstrated otherwise. (Read Justice Alito’s opinion if you don’t believe me. This decision is a Pandora’s box, mark my word. Funny thing, Hobby Lobby never had a problem with these types of birth control before. We are called to evangelize, we don’t force our beliefs on others, and NO, gay marriage doesn’t affect your freedoms or liberties one bit, unless of course you believe religious liberty is a license to impose a "Christian America"only for certain branches of the Christian faith. By the way, if you get your “Christian nation”, don’t be surprised the the Evangelicals in power don’t start moving against our “Heretical” Catholic faith. They fill their churches poaching Catholics. Remember that. They do it by lying about our faith. If they’re doing this now, what do you think they’ll do to us with more political power at their disposal? The Evangelical leaders of the “Religious freedom” crowd are a bunch of crooks who couldn’t care less about religion other than as a tool to keep the “Family values” folks happy, and to H**l with anyone who disagrees with them. If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. Be careful what you wish for. Religion is used by politicians all the time. I’m watching this unfold while shaking my head…

 

[SuperLuigi]

Some specifics, please? Or is this just “You KNOW they’re out to get us” paranoia?

A lot of people do want to see the Church destroyed.

I’d say that culiminates “out to get us”. I realize that’s a phrase that some folks like to leisurely toss around, but it can and does have meaning.

Please see the examples listed in #58

 

[SuperLuigi]

Oh, please. Marriage equality doesn’t hurt my straight marriage one bit. Whose religious values are we talking about? Last time I checked, I still live in the United States of America. Abortive birth control, my foot.

Hobby Lobby shouldn’t be providing contraception, period.

I’m starting to think that we longer live in the USA that was founded on the Constitution with the left and the youth advocating for all these made-up Constitutional rights.

The SCOTUS deicision says religious people can discriminate based on what they think is true, even if the science (A dirty word to some) has clearly demonstrated otherwise. (Read Justice Alito’s opinion if you don’t believe me.

People discriminate all the time for different reasons, and should be able to do so.

This decision is a Pandora’s box, mark my word. Funny thing, Hobby Lobby never had a problem with these types of birth control before.

It is not a Pandora’s box and was the right decision.

The Pandora’s box was the first time the United States federal government decided it could pick winners and losers.

We are called to evangelize, we don’t force our beliefs on others,

That doesn’t mean we just sit by and let the state in the public sphere do whatever. I think the Catholic Church has been very clear on it and statements such as the prior are just excuses for Catholics to continue to support left-wing positions from a selfish perspective.

and NO, gay marriage doesn’t affect your freedoms or liberties one bit, unless of course you believe religious liberty is a license to impose a "Christian America"only for certain branches of the Christian faith.

Incorrect. Getting the government involved by default in political science affects one’s freedom, especially with the courts telling Christians businesses who they should do business with.

I find it quite interesting that they are steering clear from Islam, Judaism and Southern Black Churches.

I guess they aren’t willing to issue those wonderful principles & directives of “marriage” equality if it could cost the DNC votes!

By the way, if you get your “Christian nation”, don’t be surprised the the Evangelicals in power don’t start moving against our “Heretical” Catholic faith. They fill their churches poaching Catholics.Remember that.

I’m not looking for a Christian nation; there are plenty of secular arguments against so-called gay “marriage” and contraception.

They do it by lying about our faith.

They don’t need to. There’s plenty of Catholics would do the dirty work for them and with a smile at that.

if they’re doing this now, what do you think they’ll do to us with more political power at their disposal?

Advocating for gay “marriage” and telling Hobby Lobby how to run a business in order to keep up appearences with the left is what is giving “them” more political power.

I don’t see any right-wing Protestants pushing for a Christian nation anymore.

…and to Hl with anyone who disagrees with them.**

That’s more of the attitude of radical left which now controls the Democratic Party of the United States of America.

 

[ReConverted]

A lot of people do want to see the Church destroyed.

I’d say that culiminates “out to get us”. I realize that’s a phrase that some folks like to leisurely toss around, but it can and does have meaning.

Please see the examples listed in #58

Sure, a lot of people want to see the Church destroyed. That’s a big part of our Catholic history. No argument from me on that point. However, I asked for specific sources. Verification is important. It’s all too easy to get upset about things we are “sure” are happening. If some Joe Six Pack sys that. That’s one thing. I’d like to see some people in power or running for office that Christians don’t have the right to 1st Amendment freedoms. I can point an opposite and concrete example by the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. Brilliant “reasoning” on his part: abovethelaw.com/2014/05/chief-justice-says-1st-amendment-applies-only-to-christians-and-other-stupid-stuff/

 

[ReConverted]

Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other sects?

• President James Madison

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

• President Thomas Jefferson

 

[SuperLuigi]

When the Western left uses the word “Caucasian” in the racism patrol context, it is in reference to specific descendants in specific First World nations.

They aren’t talking about Pashtuns, Russians, Ukrainians, Palestinians, Persians, North Africans ect.

 

[ReConverted]

When the Western left uses the word Caucasian in the racism patrol context, it is in reference to specific descendants in specific First World nations.

They aren’t talking about Pashtuns, Russians, Ukrainians, Palestinians, Persians, North Africans ect.

What? Even after granting some of your list, Russians and Ukrainians aren’t considered Caucasians by folks on the Left? I don’t know where you’re getting that from.

 

[Dawnia]

Some specifics, please? Or is this just “You KNOW they’re out to get us” paranoia?

Specifics of what? These are random stupid comments by people who haven’t the first clue how the government works, let alone how much work it is to change the Constitution. It has nothing to do with paranoia and everything to do with a lack of education.

But, for entertainment purposes, here is one of the nicer calls for a repeal/change of the 1st Amendment. One commentor actually says that the 1st Amendment is undemocratic.

answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101106135334AA3I7Fh

 

[ReConverted]

racism patrol context

“Racism patrol”. Hmm. Reminds me of FOX and their “Civil rights industry” insult.

Heaven forbid that people other than Catholics, Orthodox and Evangelicals have their religious liberty, which includes the right to NOT have a religion, and to NOT live under a religious government (Which the founders DETESTED and we all know that. Otherwise, they’d have established a religious government in no uncertain terms. (How is that fact WILLFULLY ignored by so many?) to be left alone by religious busybodies who’ve lost their faith and trust in God and now put it in “Government”, the very thing they claim to hate so much. (To do God’s work, of course! )

I don’t need crooks like the NRA to preserve my 2nd Amendment freedoms (Yes, I shoot guns), and I certainly don’t need crooks like James Dobson and Tony Perkins of the “Family Research Council” to protect my religious liberties. They’re nothing but phony and disingenuous cheeseball crooks. My family does just fine without them.

 

[ReConverted]

Specifics of what? These are random stupid comments by people who haven’t the first clue how the government works, let alone how much work it is to change the Constitution. It has nothing to do with paranoia and everything to do with a lack of education.

But, for entertainment purposes, here is one of the nicer calls for a repeal/change of the 1st Amendment. One commentor actually says that the 1st Amendment is undemocratic.

answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101106135334AA3I7Fh

I appreciate the link. . Entertainment purposes aside, do we have some politicians, judges, or religious leaders saying these things? I’m not asserting such things cannot occur. I’m just asking for some clear examples from those particualar arenas.

The imposition of a religious faith on an entire people is flat out wrong. Our nation was founded on that principle. We all know this. Religious persecution is a raw evil. My concern is that in the desire to protect our religious liberties, it’s far too easy to trample on those of others, and make excuse ourselves for doing so.

 

[ReConverted]

Specifics of what?

See my previous post.

 

[ReConverted]

Super Luigi wrote: "People discriminate all the time for different reasons, and should be able to do so
.

That depends on what kinds of discrimination we’re talking about. Having the right to do a thing isn’t the same as being right in doing it. I’ll give you just one example, because boy, oh boy, did you open up a can of worms. Can you say “Jim Crow”? People often used to base that on religion, too. It is the government’s job to promote the general welfare. Having laws that ban racial discrimination are wise, just, and not only than that, they are holy. By the way, freedom for black people wasn’t written into the Constitution, slavery WAS. We had to amend it to get rid of slavery. I look forward to the outrage when a few Muslims start firing women who won’t wear headscarves, because that “Interferes with their religious freedom” to have to have female workers who refuse to wear headscarves and thereby “offend” their faith.

Unintended consequences are coming from the SCOTUS “Hobby Lobby” that you won’t like. I’m reminded of the push for charter schools, which I think are fine in principle: Some charter school educators are starting to unionize. I don’t think most folks that pushed for charter schools saw that coming, to put it mildly. I use charter schools here as an analogy to illustrate surprising unexpected things that can develop, nothing more.

Soorry for any typos and bad punctuation. I’ve got some neurological issues that are making things a bit harder as time goes on. Like my wife says, “Gettin’ old ain’t fer sissies!” LOL

I hope all of you are doing well. May our LORD and our Lady bless you now and forever.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Oh, please. Marriage equality doesn’t hurt my straight marriage one bit. Whose religious values are we talking about? Last time I checked, I still live in the United States of America. Abortive birth control, my foot. The SCOTUS deicision says religious people can discriminate based on what they think is true, even if the science (A dirty word to some) has clearly demonstrated otherwise. (Read Justice Alito’s opinion if you don’t believe me. This decision is a Pandora’s box, mark my word. Funny thing, Hobby Lobby never had a problem with these types of birth control before. We are called to evangelize, we don’t force our beliefs on others, and NO, gay marriage doesn’t affect your freedoms or liberties one bit, unless of course you believe religious liberty is a license to impose a "Christian America"only for certain branches of the Christian faith. By the way, if you get your “Christian nation”, don’t be surprised the the Evangelicals in power don’t start moving against our “Heretical” Catholic faith. They fill their churches poaching Catholics. Remember that. They do it by lying about our faith. If they’re doing this now, what do you think they’ll do to us with more political power at their disposal? The Evangelical leaders of the “Religious freedom” crowd are a bunch of crooks who couldn’t care less about religion other than as a tool to keep the “Family values” folks happy, and to H**l with anyone who disagrees with them. If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. Be careful what you wish for. Religion is used by politicians all the time. I’m watching this unfold while shaking my head…

RE: gay marriage. The Catholic Church opposes gay marriage on the grounds that it is not a natural or traditional family structure. It undermines a child’s right to grow up with his or her biological mother and father. The common good of a society is best served by marriage nurturing the natural development and best interests of children. When the focus of marriage is reduced to being just about fulfilling partners’ sexual and emotional relationships, marriage loses its true, sacramental nature and can no longer be this same source of stability and optimal development. This redefinition has many negative consequences, and not just for children, for us all, especially the ones who lose their way. Because the social disintegration from this is so obvious and we see the harmful effects of it in so many people in our society, I won’t waste time going through all of that. Catholics are not seeking to impose anything on gays; Catholics have a right (I would say responsibility) to oppose gay marriage, at home, at Church, at work, in the street. Opposing gay marriage is not opposing gay people. It is not about denying anyone’s dignity. It’s not about harassing anyone. Christians are becoming victims of harassment because they do not relinquish their traditional beliefs and defense of the common good. Your harangue is actually a handy example of the hostility and disrespect that is becoming more prevalent. I don’t care if people say nasty things to me; I do care if I lose my job.

RE: abortive birth control. Christians who oppose birth control that terminates the life of a fertilized egg because they believe this constitutes abortion should be allowed to hold and act on that belief in society. (I am one of these people.) The government does not have a right to force these individuals to act against their beliefs. For example, if they run a business and don’t want to pay for these forms of birth control in an insurance policy, they should not have to. I personally don’t think Christians who oppose birth control of any kind should have to pay for any of it, abortive or not. I also likewise support conscientious objection during war. Christians oppose killing. The right to follow your conscience is the most sacred right we have in this country. It’s never been downplayed, ridiculed and threatened on such a large scale before.

I do concede this isn’t persecution such as Christians face in other parts of the world like Syria for example, where they are driven from their homes and killed daily. Sometimes I think most of us in the West don’t really bother ourselves too much about that. I don’t how much empathy we’re really capable of.

 

[ReConverted]

Hi FollowChrist34,

One issue is I see with Hobby Lobby is this: The SCOTUS decision said clearly if even if a contraceptive clearly isn’t abortifacient, if Hobby Lobby believes it is anyway, then to heck with the scientific proof. Another thing, these folks are Protestants, and they still allow other forms of contraception on employee plans. They don’t oppose all contraception, only contraception that is abortifacient. Yet, even though a couple of types they protested aren’t abortifacient, that doesn’t matter because they THINK they are anyway? Come on. That’s not anything to do with religious freedom.

As far as gay marriage goes, I’ll say it again; it doesn’t affect OR harm my straight marriage one bit. No one can make that call better than my wife and I. After all, we’re the 2 people IN our marriage, so we know what affects us. We’re doing great and our gay neighbors are as well. Gay people marrying doesn’t make my marriage any less secure, and I have yet to see one shred of proof that it does. Saying a thing causes harm and demonstrating that are 2 very different things. And yeah, it is oppression to tell a group of people they can’t marry who they love. My wife and I didn’t have to go to Federal courts to be able to marry, nor should my gay neighbors. We CHOOSE our faith, we have no right to harm others in the name of “Religious liberty” which really means the liberty for certain Christians to impose their will on society. I won’t put up with it from any group, regardless of their faith.

I would reply to your very well thought out post in more detail tonight, but I’m getting pretty weak and the arm is trembling bad so I’m off to bed. (I just love health problems. LOL)

Good discussion. Best regards to all here! G’nite!

 

[markomalley]

Hi FollowChrist34,

One issue is I see with Hobby Lobby is this: The SCOTUS decision said clearly if even if a contraceptive clearly isn’t abortifacient, if Hobby Lobby believes it is anyway, then to heck with the scientific proof. Another thing, these folks are Protestants, and they still allow other forms of contraception on employee plans. They don’t oppose all contraception, only contraception that is abortifacient. Yet, even though a couple of types they protested aren’t abortifacient, that doesn’t matter because they THINK they are anyway? Come on. That’s not anything to do with religious freedom.

As far as gay marriage goes, I’ll say it again; it doesn’t affect OR harm my straight marriage one bit. No one can make that call better than my wife and I. After all, we’re the 2 people IN our marriage, so we know what affects us. We’re doing great and our gay neighbors are as well. Gay people marrying doesn’t make my marriage any less secure, and I have yet to see one shred of proof that it does. Saying a thing causes harm and demonstrating that are 2 very different things. And yeah, it is oppression to tell a group of people they can’t marry who they love. My wife and I didn’t have to go to Federal courts to be able to marry, nor should my gay neighbors. We CHOOSE our faith, we have no right to harm others in the name of “Religious liberty” which really means the liberty for certain Christians to impose their will on society. I won’t put up with it from any group, regardless of their faith.

I would reply to your very well thought out post in more detail tonight, but I’m getting pretty weak and the arm is trembling bad so I’m off to bed. (I just love health problems. LOL)

Good discussion. Best regards to all here! G’nite!

First of all, you have to contrast what is, exactly, imposing one’s religious beliefs on another and what isn’t.

For example, if Hobby Lobby was to require their employees to attend a worship service (get them to bring the bulletin from their congregation in the following Monday as a condition of employment), that would be imposing their religious beliefs on their employees. If Hobby Lobby was to require that employee medical records be scrutinized to assure that they never received an abortion or that they were never prescribed any of these methods…again, as a condition of employment…then that would be imposing their religious beliefs on their employees. If they had mandatory meetings on a weekly basis with their employees (for Bible study or the like), that would be imposing their beliefs upon their employees. And so on.

On the other hand, Hobby Lobby is not required to provide medical insurance for their employees (even under the ACA, they aren’t required to do so: they could, without criminal penalty, drop insurance tomorrow). Yes, they’d have to pay a tax penalty…but that is not a crime, unless they refuse to pay that tax penalty. The reason they do so is that they feel compelled to do so by their faith. (Note: if they forced their employees to accept the health insurance coverage, then that would be imposing their faith on somebody else).

Hobby Lobby also pays their full time employees a minimum of $14 an hour. Well above the minimum wage and well above the market average for retail sales people. They do that because of their religious faith. So they aren’t imposing their religious beliefs on their employees, should they cut their employees’ salaries down to the market average?

The bottom line is that Hobby Lobby is not required to provide health insurance to their employees at all. In fact, it would be far cheaper for them not to do so. If they choose to provide insurance that doesn’t cover a, b, c…because doing so would violate the religious beliefs of the proprietor…or of the shareholders…then so be it. (And, yes, before you ask it, if they were members of the Watchtower Society and refused to provide coverage for therapies that involved blood transfusions, then it would include that, as well…or if they were militant vegans and refused to provide coverage for services that rely upon animal products or used animal testing as part of their development…then so be it)

(and as far as trying to derail this thread with bringing up homosexual unions, please refer yourself to one of the many existing threads elsewhere here on that subject…or start a new one)

 

[mikekle]

Whoa Whoa, hold on there. This is a very scary alarmist perspective. It’s called the 1st Amendment and there is NO WAY Christianity will become illegal. Where does the Bible exactly say you will be persecuted, tortured and killed?? Any what in your opinion, does “resist” exactly mean?

Shall we pick up arms and revolt when Gay Marriage becomes legal in all 50 states. shaking my head

Peace my brother.

Don’t Panic.

Here is one, (there are many more though)…
Matthew 24:9

Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake.

I think far too many people believe since they live in the US, they are safe from any of this, LOL

Do you think Jesus would condone revolting a nation that is completely OK with gay marriage? remember what he did to Sodom and Gomorrah, also remember he DOES consider some ‘wars/battles’ to be just, I think he would consider this just!

 

[ReConverted]

Are American Christians Persecuted?

brucegerencser.net/2014/03/american-christians-persecuted/

Interesting article. I was going to enter a portion of the text here, but I don’t know if that would violate forum rules.

 

[openmind77]

Are American Christians Persecuted?

brucegerencser.net/2014/03/american-christians-persecuted/

Interesting article. I was going to enter a portion of the text here, but I don’t know if that would violate forum rules.

Regardless whether Christians in America are being persecuted or not (and I don’t believe they are), I find the original article including some of the responses in this thread quite disturbing.

When the priest says ‘The Day May Come When We Have to Resist’, he is clearly saying that this resistance is to be done in some way that has not been tried before. There have already been a spate of law suits, many peaceful and some loud demonstrations (cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2012/March/Religious-Freedom-Focus-of-Nationwide-Rallies-Friday-/) .

So all legal means of resistance have already taken place, so is he now advocating some illegal means of resistance? Perhaps some violent means? Is he talking about taking up arms like AK47s and marching up Capitol Hill? I certainly hope he is not talking about the Oklahoma City way! Whatever he means, I find it very troubling.

And some responses on this thread seem to indicate that the posters have no faith in the US Constitution or the ability of the courts (and a very conservative SCOTUS at that) to protect their rights.

 

[markomalley]

Regardless whether Christians in America are being persecuted or not (and I don’t believe they are), I find the original article including some of the responses in this thread quite disturbing.

When the priest says ‘The Day May Come When We Have to Resist’, he is clearly saying that this resistance is to be done in some way that has not been tried before. There have already been a spate of law suits, many peaceful and some loud demonstrations (cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2012/March/Religious-Freedom-Focus-of-Nationwide-Rallies-Friday-/) .

So all legal means of resistance have already taken place, so is he now advocating some illegal means of resistance? Perhaps some violent means? Is he talking about taking up arms like AK47s and marching up Capitol Hill? I certainly hope he is not talking about the Oklahoma City way! Whatever he means, I find it very troubling.

And some responses on this thread seem to indicate that the posters have no faith in the US Constitution or the ability of the courts (and a very conservative SCOTUS at that) to protect their rights.

Actually, I can think of an almost infinite number of ways to resist that don’t involve AK-47s or mixing fertilizer with diesel fuel.

First, is to actually preach the gospel. All of it (not just the “they’ll know us by our love” part of it)

Second is to enforce canon law. Particularly Canon 915.

Third is to utterly separate out the Church’s charitable mission from the State’s social welfare mission. That is, don’t accept a dime more of government money. And then don’t be afraid to speak of Christ as you are feeding the poor, clothing the naked, and sheltering the homeless.

Fourth is to not be afraid to name names when calling out pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality politicians. They already are more than happy to do so when a politician doesn’t line up to big government social spending. They should have the same level of courage when a politician advocates for the destruction of societal morals.

Fifth is to call the Faithful to not compromise in their faith when dealing in the Polis. To include accepting either the White Martyrdom or Red Martyrdom that may accompany taking such a stance.

I could go on…but even taking those five steps would shake society.

 

[Dawnia]

And some responses on this thread seem to indicate that the posters have no faith in the US Constitution or the ability of the courts (and a very conservative SCOTUS at that) to protect their rights.

Only someone with little knowledge of US history would have the false belief that the government is willing or able to protect rights. Slavery, eugenics, Jim Crow laws, Japanese internment, forced sterilizations, secret govt experiments, and on and on and on.

If you won’t stand up for your rights, the government certainly won’t.