A state Supreme Court’s ruling was the last thing Christians were expecting

Religious freedom is under attack in America.

Christians are under constant assault from militant leftists who want to eradicate Christianity.

Now, a state Supreme Court’s ruling was the last thing Christians were expecting.

A Pew Research poll from 2015 showed that 40% of millennials (18-34) believe limiting free speech is a good thing if the speech is deemed “harmful.”

That is a chilling stat, and it coincides with the rise of atheism and decline of religiosity in the country.

People without faith believe they can perfect humanity through government force.

All they have to do is quash free speech and toss a few million people in a gulag.

But despite the relentless attacks on the First Amendment, two Christians just won a deeply important court case in support of free speech and religious expression.

Fox News reports;

A pair of Christian artists can’t be forced by the city government of Phoenix to make invitations for same-sex marriages, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Monday.

Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, the owners of Brush & Nib Studio, were accused of violating a local anti-discrimination ordinance. Monday’s 4-3 decision reversed a lower-court ruling that favored the city.

An individual has autonomy over his or her speech and thus may not be forced to speak a message he or she does not wish to say,” the court’s majority decision read.

Duka, a calligrapher, and Koski, a painter, were threatened with six months jail time and $2,500 in fines for every day they were in violation of the ordinance. They are now celebrating their judicial victory as “a huge win for religious freedom and freedom of speech.”

Leftists have resorted to last-ditch speech control efforts.

It’s bad enough they want to limit what others can say.

Now they’re actively trying to force people to say things in which they don’t believe.

Each day, the Left pushes us closer to an Orwellian nightmare where two plus two equals whatever the Left says it does.

However, these Christian artists in Arizona showed there’s power in fighting back against the lunacy of the Left.

This is why having honest judges who are constitutionalists is so important.

A few activist judges can put terrible and scary laws into effect.


You may also like...

74 Responses

  1. Diana says:

    I think freedom should work both ways. You are free to seek a same sex marriage if you want to. The others are free to help you or not. You each have a choice to make and should be free to make that choice. My personal choice. I see nothing wrong with same sex marriages. There is not enough love in this world that we should sneer at any of it..

  2. Jack Handy says:

    KUDOS To AZ State Supreme Court RULING.
    2 + ‘agitators’ Here, Are Always WAY 0FF Topic.
    (& then ppl get ‘stirred’ up) , which IS their ‘purpose’. __
    FOCUS 0N the GOOD. ! Thank you.
    then Thank Yourselves For Doing So.
    LIFE IS ‘BETTER’ that ‘Way’. Wouldn’t you Agree???

    • Jack Handy says:

      ps. hmm. This PP site, Should NOT serve as a venue for
      Liberal ‘classes/Teachings’ that ARE Allowed
      in some High Schools /Colleges. ( & ‘pre-school For
      That FACT) &&& ALL under
      ‘ THE GUISE’ of Free Speech.
      > SOME ‘free Speech’ In ‘planting Seeds’, IS DEVASTATING.
      > &&& ‘WE’ ARE Witnessing ‘such’, NOW. Does it provide
      Happy, Joy, Peace Feeling ??? eom.

  3. Charles says:

    Judges, being activist or constitutionalists, should NOT BE MAKING ANY LAWS. That is not their jobs. Only Congress and legislatures have the powers to make laws.

  4. Jack Handy says:

    To PP. Talk about
    hogging Space’. @ vasu.

  5. Vasu Murti says:

    Pro-life Catholic Cassy Fiano claims she opposes abortion on secular grounds, but writes on Live Action: “I despise hearing abortion advocates screech about the elusive separation of church and state (which doesn’t actually exist), using it as an argument for why abortion should be legal.”

    Church-state separation is not a myth (see below). A secular society is laissez-faire toward all belief AND disbelief, which protects religious minorities, atheists, agnostics, etc. This country (the United States) wasn’t founded by Christians.

    (If you expect those outside of your faith to be bound by secular arguments on to protect the unborn, will you likewise be bound by secular arguments to protect animals? Or will you cry “MOVE”! as if we were discussing some lifeless, soulless thing, devoid of religious inspiration? And when pro-lifers are shown the long history of animal advocacy within Christianity, will they say, “Animal rights are a Christian cause! Like civil rights and/or protection of unborn children. This is a cause we Christians must support!” ?)

    A Roman Catholic priest, Reverend David K. O’Rourke, said, “Every religious group in the United States is a minority group. Some may be unhappy with this status and wish they had official standing. I am not unhappy with it. The Catholic Church, the largest of these minorities, has prospered greatly in this country where we separate church and state.”

    According to journalist Rob Boston of Americans United for Separation of Church and State: “We have a vibrant, multifaith religious society that, with the exception of a few fundamentalist Muslim states, is admired all over the globe.

    “We have a degree of interfaith harmony unmatched in the world. Our government is legally secular, but our culture accommodates and welcomes a variety of religious voices. New faiths take root here without fear…

    “Americans remain greatly interested in religion and things spiritual—unlike their counterparts in Western Europe, where religion is often state subsidized but of little interest to most people….

    “Children are no longer forced to pray in school or read from religious texts against their will, yet they are free to engage in truly voluntary religious worship whenever they feel the need. The important task of imparting religious and philosophical training to youngsters is left where it always belonged—with each child’s parents or guardians…

    “Some European nations have passed so-called anticult laws aimed at curbing the rights of unpopular new religions. Such laws would not be acceptable in the United States or permitted under the First Amendment.

    “In a multifaith society such as the United States,” observes Boston, “a type of religious marketplace does exist. Religious groups that aggressively seek converts, such as the Mormons and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, are well aware that people in the United States are able and even willing to change their religious beliefs. To these groups, it’s well worth it to enter the marketplace and advertise their goods. Lots of people might buy them…

    “Because the U.S. government is secular, religious groups are left to contend for members based solely on their own initiative. They create a free marketplace of religion that spurs competition and a vigorous religious life. This explains why the United States, which maintains church-state separation, retains a high degree of religiosity among its people.

    “The more sophisticated and perceptive believers realize that the separation principle is a boon to their faith,” notes Boston. “They see danger in any attempt by government to decide which religion is true and which is false.

    “They know that a faith that is in favor with the government today can be out of favor tomorrow. These believers are thankful for the free marketplace of religion and the secular state that makes it possible. They understand that the way to get new members is through persuasion, not government aid.”

    In 1787 when the framers excluded all mention of God from the Constitution, they were widely denounced as immoral and the document was denounced as godless, which is precisely what it is. Opponents of the Constitution challenged ratifying conventions in nearly every state, calling attention to Article VI, Section 3:

    “No religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

    An anti-federalist in North Carolina wrote: “The exclusion of religious tests is by many thought dangerous and impolitic. Pagans, Deists and Mohammedans might obtain office among us.”

    Amos Singletary of Massachussetts, one of the most outspoken critics of the Constitution, said that he “hoped to see Christians (in power), yet by the Constitution, a papist or an infidel was as eligible as they.”

    Luther Martin, a Maryland delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 wrote that “there were some members so unfashionable as to think that a belief in the existence of a Deity, and of a state of future rewards and punishments would be some security for the good conduct of our rulers, and that in a Christian country, it would be at least decent to hold out some distinction between the professors of Christianity and downright infidelity or paganism.”

    Martin’s report shows that a “Christian nation” faction had its say during the convention, and that its views were consciously rejected.

    The United States Constitution is a completely secular political document. It begins “We the people,” and contains no mention of “God,” “Jesus,” or “Christianity.” Its only references to religion are exclusionary, such as the “no religious test” clause (Article VI), and “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” (First Amendment)

    The presidential oath of office, the only oath detailed in the Constitution, does not contain the phrase “so help me God” or any requirement to swear on a Bible (Article II, Section 1).

    The words “under God” did not appear in the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954, when Congress, under McCarthyism, inserted them.

    Similarly, “In God we Trust” was absent from paper currency before 1956, though it did appear on some coins beginning in 1864.

    The original U.S. motto, written by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson, is “E Pluribus Unum” (“Of Many, One”) celebrating plurality and diversity.

    In 1797, America made a treaty with Tripoli, declaring that “the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” This reassurance to Islam was written under Washington’s presidency and approved by the Senate under John Adams.

    We are not governed by the Declaration of Independence. Its purpose was to “dissolve the political bonds,” not to set up a religious nation. Its authority was based upon the idea that “governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” which is contrary to the biblical concept of rule by divine authority.

    The Declaration deals with laws, taxation, representation, war, immigration, etc., and doesn’t discuss religion at all. The references to “Nature’s God,” “Creator,” and “Divine Providence” in the Declaration do not endorse Christianity. Its author, Thomas Jefferson, was a Deist, opposed to Christianity and the supernatural.

    “Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus,” wrote Thomas Jefferson. However, Jefferson admitted, “In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man and that other parts are the fabric of very inferior minds…”

    It was Thomas Jefferson who established the separation of church and state. Jefferson was deeply suspicious of religion and of clergy wielding political power.

    Jefferson helped create the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom in 1786, incurring the wrath of Christians by his fervent defense of toleration of atheists:

    “The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are only injurious to others. But it does no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

    Jefferson advocated a “wall of separation” between church and state not to protect the church from government intrusion, but to preserve the freedom of the people:

    “I consider the doctrines of Jesus as delivered by himself to contain the outlines of the sublimest morality that has ever been taught;” he observed, “but I hold in the most profound detestation and execration the corruptions of it which have been invested by priestcraft and established by kingcraft, constituting a conspiracy of church and state against the civil and religious liberties of mankind.”

    Jefferson and the founding fathers were products of the Age of Enlightenment. Their world view was based upon Deism, secularism, and rationalism.

    “The priests of the different religious sects dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight,” wrote Jefferson. “The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his Father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter…we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away all this…”

    As late as 1820, Jefferson was convinced everyone in the United States would die a Unitarian. Jefferson, Madison and Paine’s writings indicate that America was never intended to be a Christian theocracy. “I have sworn upon the altar of God,” wrote Jefferson, “eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”

    In his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists, Jefferson wrote:

    “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”

    Similarly, in an 1824 letter to John Cartwright, Jefferson expressed anger at judges who had based rulings on their belief that Christianity is part of the common law. Cartwright had written a book critical of these judges, and Jefferson was glad to see it. Observed Jefferson:

    “The proof of the contrary, which you have produced, is controvertible; to wit, that the common law existed while the Anglo-Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never yet heard the name of Christ pronounced, or knew that such a character had ever existed.”

    Jefferson challenged “the best-read lawyer to produce another script of authority for this judicial forgery” and concluded, “What a conspiracy this, between Church and State!”

    As president, Jefferson put his “wall of separation” theory into practice. He refused to issue proclamations calling for days of prayer and fasting, insisting that they violate the First Amendment. As early as 1779, Jefferson proposed a bill before the Virginia legislature that would have established a series of elementary schools to teach the basics—reading, writing, and arithmetic.

    Jefferson even suggested that “no religious reading, instruction, or exercise shall be prescribed or practiced, inconsistent with the tenets of any religious sect or denomination.” Jefferson did not regard public schools as the proper agent to form children’s religious views.

    As president, James Madison also put his separationist philosophy into action. He vetoed two bills he believed would violate church-state separation. The first was an act incorporating the Episcopal Church in the District of Columbia that gave the church the authority to care for the poor. The second was a proposed land grant to a Baptist church in Mississippi.

    Had Madison, the father of the Constitution, believed that all the First Amendment was intended to do was bar setting up a state church, he would have approved these bills. Instead, he vetoed both, and in his veto messages to Congress explicitly stated that he was rejecting the bills because they violated the First Amendment.

    Later in his life, James Madison came out against state-paid chaplains, writing, “The establishment of the chaplainship to Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles.” He also concluded that his calling for days of prayer and fasting during his presidency had been unconstitutional.

    In an 1819 letter to Robert Walsh, Madison wrote, “the number, the industry and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the state.” In an undated essay called the “Detached Memoranda,” written in the early 1800s, Madison wrote, “Strongly guarded… is the separation between Religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States.”

    In 1833 Madison responded to a letter sent to him by Jasper Adams. Adams had written a pamphlet titled “The Relations of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States,” which tried to prove that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. Madison wrote back: “In the papal system, government and religion are in a manner consolidated, and that is found to be the worst of government.”

    Madison, like Jefferson, was confident that separation of church and state would protect both the institutions of government and religion. Late in his life, Madison wrote to a Lutheran minister about this, declaring, “A due distinction… between what is due to Caesar and what is due to God, best promotes the discharge of both obligations… A mutual independence is found most friendly to practical religion, to social harmony, and to political prosperity.”

    In the early part of the 19th century, a general understanding existed that the government should not promote religion, or favor one religion over another. In 1829, Senator Richard Johnson of Kentucky wrote:

    “It is not the legitimate province of the Legislature to determine what religion is true, or what is false. Our Government is a civil and not a religious institution. Our Constitution recognizes in every person the right to choose his own religion, and to enjoy it freely, without molestation. Whatever may be the religious sentiments of citizens, and however variant, they are alike entitled to protection from the Government, so long as they do not invade the rights of others…

    “Among all the religious persecutions with which almost every page of modern history is stained, no victim ever suffered but for violation of what Government denominated the law of God. To prevent a similar train of evils in this country, the Constitution has wisely withheld from our Government the power of defining the divine law.”

    • Bob Shields says:

      There is no provision stating a separation of church and state. What the Constitution states is there cannot be a religious test to holding office. It is further clarified in the First Amendment that Congress cannot establish a religion nor prevent the free expression of religion. Too many people nowadays think it means freedom from religion not freedom of religion.

    • Rod says:

      You should not be loading canned files on this site!!! I sometimes write long but I do load files that took all day to package!!

      Besides you lose the readers after to long a posting! THEY DON’T HAVE ALL DAY FOR YOUR BULL SHALE, EVEN IF TRUE.

    • Rod says:

      I’m on my cell phone, your post was 19 2/3’s screens long that is a FILE, not a posting.

    • Gregory Sullivan says:

      Mr. Murti;
      With all your long tweets here, you should write a book entitled “tweets from an imbecile”

    • meozzie says:

      Did not read. Too long.

      • Jack Handy says:

        TOO LONG. &&& I Have posted Repeatedly,
        WRITE A ‘damn Book !!!
        >This guy Is 0n a 0ne Way Track – & REFUSES
        to See ‘what’ That ‘Track’ Has Done to the
        Rest of the World. SAVE USA, last Country STANDING.

    • Braveryder says:

      Write a book not a comment.

  6. Considering Most Practicing Christians follow the pagan days, and Sabbath, I think that is Good. When the Liberals mae th Bible an illegal religion, and banned it in our Shools, well it turned off something that started our downhill spiral into the Gutter Everyone knew jesus then, Now, not even the Chtistians do. They follow another Jesus. One that does not follow the Bible. Like the Jews in the Oldtestament, who felt tht they had to cover all of the baees by following pagan gods. Even the one that wanted them to tie up their kids a sacrificed them in the fire for the one pagn god, or allowing their children to becomce Temple Prostitutes for the ertility gods

  7. Dr. J.D. says:

    while it make shock some of you that I agree with the decision of this court, I would like to ask that people be careful of the “non sequitors” (that does not follow) of this article. This article went from ” Pew Research poll from 2015 showed that 40% of millennials (18-34) believe limiting free speech is a good thing if the speech is deemed “harmful” to “it coincides with the rise of atheism and decline of religiosity in the country.” That does not follow and is a unrelated point. They are two different issues, you just assumed go together – – – almost like saying, “most DUIs occur on weekend outings,” Bill and his friends go out on weekends”, therefore Bill and his friends are drunk drivers. Non sequitor.

  8. ssoldie says:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

    • Alaska Woman says:

      Exactly, however, Congress is not a court of law.

    • Rod says:

      When the Bill of Rights was written it was not forgotten that the British government had an OFFICIAL CHURCH and here in the then New York colony their were many church’s ,Dutch , Lutheran etc etc.

      FREEDOM OF RELIGION!!!!!!!!!!

      You could practice your faith of choice and NOT HAVE TO SUPPORT THE FAITH OF ANYONE ELSE!!!!


  9. JACK says:


    • Dr. J. D. says:

      But Jack, you are countering the point of this article and the idea of freedom of speech! You just violated the whole idea that someone could hold a political position or thought other than what conservatives think (or even liberals) and be forced to give up their freedoms as guaranteed under the first amendment. That is what fascists want to do, not this country, as we see both the writings and constitution of the founders/

    • Jack, only if the first person is Trump, the most corrupt, and evil {residenty in History. . Teal conservatives would start by putting the Bible Back in Schools. Would giv to the country the fear of God. Ommigrants would be treated with love, and Respect It does not mean that you cart blanche allow them in the country, Just Treat them with respect, and kindness, and not like they are worse than we treat people on Death row for killing others

      • George says:

        The POTUS is not a dictator and our 3 branches of government was designed to prevent that and actions to the contrary create a Civil War. American history already had that and the warmongers need to know we Americans can see through their propaganda. Military people are allowed to question orders from a ethical standpoint and ask questions, before executing the orders. That’s what current soldiers have told me.
        But poverty at any level creates action. Poverty is also created through ignorance. I was one of them especially when it came to knowledge of income taxes. After finding Title 26 USC section 3402(n) and (p) I quickly changed my payroll from voluntarily becoming subject taxable income and decided to keep that money for my family, with paying down debts, better quality of food on the table, getting ahead of utility bills. It’s the LAW, not a loophole. I just became smarter and reap the rewards. If every employee got smarter with their payroll taxes, America will then become TRULY Great Again.

  10. Desert Fox says:

    The government cannot specify one religion as the countries religion; however, I believe they can rule on cults that are determined unhealthy in their teachings and practices..

    • Dr. J.D. says:

      Agreed. There have always been certain limits to freedom of speech, such as one cannot yell “fire” in a crowded theater or call a “bomb threat” to a public school, causing harm, perhaps people being hurt in the panic. And speech that advocates the destruction of another group of Americans would be a limit also. As this court ruled appropriately, you cannot force someone in business to advocate your values. I certainly agree with this court decision.

  11. Read this remarkable statement that “Force is the last resort of every false religion.” Wonder if we could say the same thing about the government on maters of religion?

  12. Vladilyich says:

    What you don’t seem to realize is that this sets a legal precedent that authorizes a business (Facebook, Twitter) to refuse to allow something they don’t believe in (right-wing posting) on THEIR platform, which they OWN.

    • Dr. JD says:

      Just keep bringing up those thoughtful ideas, Vladilyich. I think it does get to a point that can be dangerous, which is the TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY, where we can say, refuse to accept say a Catholic wedding business if we are protestants – – so it is a fine line. But in the world where there are a variety of businesses, to force one to take our business, when people can go elsewhere, is not tyranny.

  13. Shirley Riggles says:

    We need to fight atheism with the church. No more being silent and letting these atheist get leftist judges to block Christian beliefs and freedom of speech. Atheism is a religion and as they use the liberal courts to fight Christianity so should the church use the reputable courts to “Crumble” the efforts of these Anti God in this country.

    • Joan Freda says:

      It would be nicer if the Pope doesn’t lean to the left…..which he has. He should keep his holy nose out of politics and tend to doing pope business……………….

      • The Catholic Church is a pagan church. What do you expect. You only get parts of thr Bile out of them. Like 25%.

        • Dr. J. D. says:

          Growing up Catholic is not the same for all who experience it, because there are variations per religious order and in different countries of the world. It is not a pagan church, while it has adopted many pagan ideas throughout its history. But the strongest point you make, Fred, is that my experience under Dominican order and Catholicism in mid-20th century is that that teach their selected literature, then the Baltimore Catechism, not the Bible. In Catholic schools you took theology 5 days a week and on Sunday, but my first experience sending us to the Bible was my junior year in high school. There I discovered, even with the Catholic Bible, a lot of variation from what Catholics practice and the teachings of Jesus. In several ways, they have changed the teachings of Jesus dramatically, making the CLERGY the church and not honoring the priesthood of believers and that we do NOT need to go THROUGH anyone to directly have a relationship with our Beloved Divine Father.

          • walkedAway Liberal says:

            Catholic? A True Dis-Grace, in your
            ‘thinking Today’.
            now you Teach Religion’?
            Your brain ‘flies’ Wild. Get 0ff
            the supp’s’s 0r whatever.
            & YES, YOU ‘better’ Talk to “Beloved
            Divine Father” , Better Yet the H.S.
            As You 0r Anyone Cannot ‘TALK To
            D. F. You Are ‘out there’ jd. but Keep
            Trying. you HAVE a LOT to Answer for.

  14. Viet Vet says:

    Not only doesn’t the U.S. Constitution say there is to be a separation of Church and State. but the Northwest Ordinance, passed in the same time frame as the Constitution directed that school children should be taught religion in the schools. When Alexis de Tocqueville visited the U.S. in the 1820s-30s, to study the United States, the first thing he said he noted was the religious nature of the country. When Thomas Paine misjudged the French Revolution and wrote his screed, The Age of Reason, he was ostracized in the United States and basically became a man without a country. There is all kinds of documentation on the religious founding of the United States. For 30 years after the Founding, Founding Fathers served in high political office: presidents, vice presidents, secy of state, secy of treasury, senators, congressmen, judges, supreme court chief justice. IF they Founders had wanted the religious part of the 1st amendment (and other parts of the constitution) interpreted as the leftist communists do today, it would have been that way from the beginning, not 200 and some years down the road.

    • Dr. J. D. says:

      Very thoughtful and researched post, Viet Vet! One interesting point I would add to your thoughtful post is that, of course the early European settlers often came to America in order that they could have their religious freedoms, to practice their values. But then, these Puritans, turn right around and harass and seek to suppress, if not eradicate the religious practices of another religious group, the Quakers. Most religions believe their arr the right way, and seek to establish their ways into the law, but it often ends up suppressing the rights of others to practice their faith.

    • You are wrong.It does, but not fo the reason that everyone says. Back in the 18 century, many of the European nations had state churches. England had the church of Enland, the Dutch had the Lutheran religion, and I believe Italy had the Caholic Church,. Most of today’s main line Churches are Not Biblically based. You will not find Christmas, easter, and the Sabbath Changed to the first day of thr week in the Bbile. Many of these churches do a second thing. They do ot allow you to read the old Testament, outside of a few Stories. About the most important books of the Bible is the book of Proverbs Most Jewsish businessmen follow this book closely even if they are not practicing. In fact it is what makes them successful

  15. Mike Flanagan says:

    The constitution ‘DOES NOT” say there is a separation of Church and State. On the contrary the founding Fathers did not practice the act of separation of Church and State. On the contrary the Founding Fathers Practiced their Religion and the recognition of ‘GOD’ In all their government and private lives.
    What the Founding Fathers meant in the US Constitution was that the Government ‘COULD NOT ESTABLISH’ a State Religion as England had. Again the US constitution does not and never did say there was a ‘SEPERATION of State & Religion (Church)’

    • Maxx says:

      You are absolutely correct about the Constitution. The left has been using that lie probably since the 1800’s. It states “nothing” about a separation. The only thing the Founders insisted on was that our government not establish a government mandated religion the way Henry VIII of England did with the establishment of the Anglican religion / church because the Catholic Church leaders would not allow him to divorce his first wife. Of course democrats have shown for many decades that they know nothing about the Constitution that they continue to this day to attempt to destroy/rewrite.

    • Gregory Sullivan says:

      Mike Flanagan:
      Try telling what you have just said to the commies at the ACLU who used this separation of church and state s***. to take down religious symbols on city, state, and federal properties using leftist activist judges to rule in their favour. They should be investigated for violating the RICO statutes which goes after rackateers which that organisation engages in daily. This would put them out of business permanently and gaol all of its members.

  16. Eileen Craig says:

    No I believe even the Baker business was done wrong as well. This is America after all. Our public education system is failing this country. Kids dont even know the basics of our history. That’s sad. Must continue to put our faith in God.

  17. Mike says:


  18. Carl J Bujan says:

    The left keeps pushing and pushing us closer to a civil war.

  19. Vasu Murti says:

    “If a Christian baker or florist chooses not to participate in a gay wedding because it goes against his or her religious beliefs of traditional marriage, liberal activists turn their lives upside down with harassment campaigns and endless litigation.”

    Well, that’s an exaggeration. Conservatives have argued on the grounds of religious freedom that a Christian baker should not be forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding, asking along these lines, “Should a kosher delicatessen be forced to serve non-kosher food?”

    A kosher delicatessen is set up with a specific purpose, so no, a kosher delicatessen should not be forced to carry non-kosher food, any more than a Christian bookstore should be forced to carry non-Christian literature, nor should a Mexican restaurant be forced to serve Chinese food, no should a vegan restaurant be forced to serve meat, etc.

    If a Christian business like a bakery is set up for a specific Christian purpose (e.g., not participating in secular birthdays, graduations, weddings, etc.), then they can argue against being forced to participate in same-sex weddings. But if they’re open to the public, refusing to serve LGBTs *is* discrimination.

    • Walter E Beverly III says:

      WRONG! Whether I am doing my business for religious reasons or not is immaterial. Each and every day we are to practice our religion in our daily lives. If helping someone celebrate their LGBT wedding, violated my religious beliefs, then by the 1st Amendment of the Constitution I am ENTITLED to do so. Whether my business is open to the public or not.

      • Allen Morgan says:

        You’re correct and of course the idiot Vasu is wrong again and again. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wagon were not set up as a religious business but were closely held family businesses with family members that were highly religious. SCOTUS determined this was enough to rebuke the mandate of the Obama regime in demanding they provide abortion drugs in their health care protocols. Hobby Lobby won.

    • CHARLES M COLSON says:

      There is a statement that all business owners seem to adhere to. We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason. I do not know if this is law. Even though I will not argue the discrimination issue to a point. I still believe the owners had the right to refuse service, regardless of their reasons.

      • Max says:

        You are correct. A business has such a right and the IRS Tax rules even add to that idea because the IRS assumes a business to be an extension of the owner/s in the way taxes are assessed. The owner of the business is ultimately responsible to pay tax for income the business obtains. A business does not need to “incorporate”. We now have a myriad of business entities that convey some level of legal protections without incorporating. Just look at any law firm. Most of them now use LLC where the business income is counted as “individual income” and one is taxed at individual rates.

    • Keith says:

      “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” If your exercising your religion the government cannot make you do something that is against your religious beliefs, go back to India if you do not like it here. Liberals look at faith like it is a disease that needs to be cured, much like many religions have made homosexuality, now try looking at this from the other direction, the atheist’s would not want their doings prohibited by government, so imagine a deeply atheist person being asked to make cards that are for a religious event, in the same light they do not have to…. It is freedom, and the government needs to get out of our lives and just do what thy do best, spend taxpayer money on stupid things. It is not discrimination if they advertise and post as a christian company, it is discrimination that the customer expects service when they know it goes against the company owners believes, it is not just discrimination but also unconstitutional! All they have to have is a sign stating they do not believe in same sex weddings, done. Stop being a fool.

    • Rod says:




  20. Vasu Murti says:

    I agree with the founding fathers on the Constitution and separation of church and state. The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion (meaning the government can’t favor one religion over another) nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

    “…respecting an establishment of religion,” in a broader sense of the word, really does mean freedom of belief. Thomas Jefferson was laissez-faire (“hands-off!”) towards all belief and disbelief, not caring whether his neighbor believes in twenty gods or no god. Religious leaders warned that if Jefferson were elected, Bibles would be confiscated, churches would be closed down, etc. Clearly, that didn’t happen. Secularists are NOT atheists.

    Most violations of church-state separation, however, are not coming from Muslims, but from Christians pushing their religion on others where it doesn’t belong: Christian prayers in the public schools; Christian prayers before city council meetings; theistic expressions like “In God We Trust” on coins and currency; theistic expressions like “one nation under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, etc.

    We’re NOT talking about radical Islam and beheadings, but about Muslim Americans and persons merely mistakenly perceived to be Muslim (e.g., Sikhs, Hindus, Bahai’s and Buddhists) facing discrimination here in the United States.

    The Department of Justice noted that it has investigated over a thousand hate crimes and other acts of discrimination against faith groups since September 11th, 2001. This disturbing trend correlates to a steady rise in crimes committed against Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim. The real 2014 total of anti-Muslim hate crimes could be as many as six thousand or more.

    In February 2016, a still-unidentified suspect broke into a Minneapolis mosque and vandalized it. Earlier, a Spokane, Wash., man broke into a local Sikh gurdwara and caused $35,000 worth of damage; he told police he believed he had discovered a mosque affiliated with ISIS. And a Buddhist monk was attacked in Oregon after a man mistook him for a Muslim.

    The Lincoln County Commission in North Carolina Chair Carrol Mitchem told local news outlets in 2015 that he has no intention of allowing any non-Christians to offer invocations before commission meetings because Christians constitute a majority in the United States. “I don’t need no Arab or Muslim or whoever telling me what to do or us here in the county what to do about praying,” Mitchem said. “If they don’t like it, stay the hell away.”

    That is what religious discrimination actually looks like.

    It’s a far cry from asking bakers to obey public accommodation laws.

    Joseph Callahan similarly commented on the Huffington Post in 2015:

    “It is pretty hard now days to turn on the television or open a newspaper without hearing about ‘the war on Christianity’ and see devout believers lamenting on how horribly they are ‘persecuted’ in America today. With gay marriage, abortion and atheists removing God from every aspect of the government, it seems pretty obvious that we secular citizens are using separation of church and state as a new battlefield against religion. How horrible a life American Christians must be forced to live.

    “In Iran, Christians are being executed for their faith. In Myanmar, you can be thrown in prison just for owning a Bible. In North Korea, well, you face death just for believing any god exists. The 2015 report from the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) shows that thirteen million people have fled seven countries (Syria, Iraq, Nigeria, Central African Republic (CAR), Eritrea, Burma, and Afghanistan). Many of those displaced are Christians, and mostly due to fear of violence and/or death.

    “The Bible, and distributing it, is restricted in over fifty countries worldwide, and spreading the gospel will land you in jail or executed in many of those. But none of this compares to the wholly American horror of (possibly) being forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding! How could we compare the American ‘war on Christianity’ to the Christians (and other religious beliefs) persecuted worldwide? I mean, our own little bubble, and our own discomforts in the first world are all that really matter. The rest of the world isn’t us, so we shouldn’t compare ourselves to them, right?

    “In America today, you can proudly say, ‘I’m a Christian’ and carry a Bible with you everywhere you go. You can go to any church you want to without being arrested. You can say anything you want! You can even proclaim that you worship the Giant Spaghetti Monster, and all the persecution you will receive is strange looks from some people.’

    “Yet, in this, one of the most religiously tolerant nations, Christians are screaming persecution just because our laws are changing to embrace everyone’s belief structure. By not allowing one faith to force their beliefs down our legal throats, the country has launched a ‘war’ on (one specific) faith.”

    Anyone perceived to be Muslim, like Sikhs, Hindus, Bahai’s and Buddhists, often face the same discrimination. Religious minorities in this country are merely asking for the same level of consideration and equal treatment given to Christians.

    It was reported in the Indo-American press in either the ’90s or 2000s that a coalition of Hindus, Buddhists, and Jains were going to court to demand a completely religion-neutral society, which does not favor one religion over another, nor one set of beliefs or disbeliefs over another.

    I’m Hindu, not Muslim. The fact that American liberals refer derisively to the Christian right in this country as “the American Taliban” indicates disdain for the Islamic Taliban. Again, secularists are NOT atheists.

    • Walter E Beverly III says:

      I don’t give a rat’s behind what your religious beliefs are. The fact is there in a prohibition on the part of government to ESTABLISH a religion. That does not mean that the government can restrict my practice of my religion in any way shape or form.
      I am glad that the Justice Dept is investigating allegations of a “hate crime”. Did you know that better than 70% are found not to be hate crimes of any kind? And that of the remaining 30% only about 5% are actual “hate crimes”.
      Christians do not engage in hate as you allege. We do defend our religion. BIG DIFFERENCE. But Radical Muslims certainly do. Atheists many times do.
      And just for your edification MOST “secularists” are in fact atheists.

    • Linda M. says:

      Vasu: I gave you your answer(s) on another storties. But you keep pushing your Nazi propaganda over and over again.. You are a liar, deceiver and a hypocrite !!! And I read about your Hindu religion and how they hate all other religions , especially Christians. So stop twisting facts and truths……You truly are a Demon for life….

  21. In the end, prayer and good, will over take evil. People are realizing how far the country has fallen since we started rejecting God. At present , it is a power struggle between good and evil. If evil wins , the world loses, if good wins the world triumphs. PRAYER IS THE MOST POWERFUL WEAPON ON EARTH. WEAPONS DESTROY, PRAYER HEALS.

  22. Douglas Mayne says:

    The democrats are horrible people they forgot who landed on Plymouth rock to leave religious repression the pilgrims came here with absolutely nothing so they can seek their own religious beliefs and this country was founded on God-fearing beliefs.. They forgot about the separation of church and state they forgot about freedom of speech. They forgot about freedom from a repressing king that we want a revolution for and thousands upon thousands died for our freedom from a tyranny of England During our Revolutionary War. And it was a Republican Abraham Lincoln that defended the country from dividing and freeing the slaves. They even forgot about taxation without representation they said Obama care was just going to be a penalty charge the Supreme Court decision was that it wasn’t a penalty charge you can’t charge American citizens a penalty so it must be deemed as a tax. At that point It should have gone right back to Congress to be re voted upon as a tax but it didn’t they passed it in 48 hours were no one even had the ability to read the 2228 page diary that they made with this erroneous obamacare. That my friends is taxation without representation. Number one reason why we had a revolution every war with England for taxing Our tea that was just tea they taxed our health care. And now finally we have a president that’s taking back the country for the people for the United States citizens and fighting tooth and nail against the democratic regime the deep state horrifying terrorist group. And to think there are idiots in this country that believe whatever comes out of the mouth of a Democrat is correct they could never be so wrong and may God help them. Cause it’s far as I’m concerned they’re all going straight to hell

  23. Loyd says:

    John King I support everything that you said in your comment.

  24. John King says:

    I am wanting for President Trump to do what Obama did . . . fire every Obama placed Judge and place Constitution supporting Judges in their place! Obama judges made law, they didn’t enforce it!

    And I am waiting for President Trump to de-fund any and all cities and States that continue to harbor and hide illegal aliens thru these ‘sanctuary city’ actions! There has been to many deaths caused by people that don’t belong in America . . . by those that were deported more than once . . . by those that sanctuary cities have protected . . . AND IT’S WAY PAST TIME TO DEAL WITH THESE CITIES THAT PROTECT THESE CRIMINALS!!!

  25. Timothy Toroian says:

    Hey, Jackasses, harmful to one may not be harmful to others. But that garbage you are spewing IS harmful to me and others like me, believers of the Constitution. We wouldn’t imprison you BUT would knock the living crap out of you if you tried to imprison us or disrupt any kind of gathering in which we participate!!

  26. Mary Johnson says:

    This just goes to show the Democrats are the NWO which for those that do not know what this stands for is New World Order a group of Satan and is believers. This is communist at it’s worst the taking of the first amendment and do we as American not fight for these freedoms every day all over the world and the Democrats want to take that away from the American People. Democrats = Satan.

  27. Robert Ratto says:

    The left screams Freedom of speech and when your speech disagrees with them they do everything they can to block it. There was reference to Orwell’s book 1984. I read that book when it was still possible. In that book your thoughts, speech and life style was controlled by the Government.If you didn’t comply you were arrested and sent to reeducation facility. The left is trying to control you in the same way. Look what they trying to do to the NRA and its members, Try to be a conservative and speak on a liberal campus,and try to be a conservative and express your opinion online. I was a victim of that. I stated some historical facts, it was so altered and a lot of what I pointed out was edited out so much that it made very little sense. Everything I pointed can be be verified. It is not what they wanted you read so therefore I was secured.This what just happened in Sweden. I don’t know about you but my thoughts are mine not theirs and they have no right to control them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: