Known as the “father of Communism” and the author of the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx stated – “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.” And a group of researchers agrees with his assessment, believing that if one has a government, then a religion is not needed. The conclusion the researchers drew is that “religiosity” wanes as people receive more in the form of help from government programs, and government if fact becomes their “god” for all intents and purposes.
According to the article, “Religion as an Exchange System: The Interchangeability of God and Government in a Provider Role,” published April 12, 2018, in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin –
“Researchers call it an exchange model of religion: If people can get what they need from the government (be it health care, education or welfare) they’re less likely to turn to a divine power for help, according to the theory. But are people actually more likely to drop religion in places where governments provide more services and stability? In a new paper, psychology researchers crunched the numbers — and found that better government services were in fact linked to lower levels of strong religious beliefs. Those findings held true in states across the U.S. and in countries around the world, researchers said.”
Given this thought process, and the fact that a recent poll cites that the majority of millennials would actually prefer to live in a socialist, communist or fascist nation rather than a capitalistic one, it is no wonder that America is growing increasingly hostile towards people of faith. In the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation’s “Annual Report on U.S. Attitudes Toward Socialism,” some 58% of Millenials and Generation Z would prefer to live under some form of socialism or communism, compared to 42% who stated they preferred capitalism.
The growing penchant for socialism or even communism, and the growing hostility towards those with religious beliefs, namely Christians, was fostered under the former Obama administration. Family Research Council president Tony Perkins noted – “The recent spike in government-driven religious hostility is sad, but not surprising, especially considering the Obama administration’s antagonism toward biblical Christianity.”
Since 2014 there has been a 76% increase in religious freedom violations, according to “Hostility to Religion: The Growing Threat to Religious Liberty in America.” Perkins notes in a recent 66-page report the necessity of the current Trump administration to end policies in federal agencies that “fan the flames of this religious intolerance.”
Among the cases listed in the report –
- An 11-year-old student in Hattiesburg, Mississippi was penalized for mentioning Jesus in a Christmas poetry assignment.
- Principal Frank Lay and Athletic Director Robert Freedom were charged with criminal contempt because they prayed over a meal.
- A Christian acapella group at James Madison University was told they could not perform “Mary Did You Know” because it was religious. They were directed to only sing secular songs.
- An Ohio library banned a Christian group from meeting to discuss natural marriage unless the group also included supports of same-s*x marriage.
- Allstate Insurance Company fired a staffer for allegedly using a company laptop to write a column against homosexuality. The company alleged said the column violated its diversity standards.
- San Diego firefighters were threatened with disciplinary action if they refused to participate in a gay pride parade. The firefighters were subjected to verbal abuse and sexual gestures during the parade.
- A woman who rented out rooms in her home was sued after she refused to rent to a same-s*x couple.
- An Oklahoma bank was forced to remove religious Christmas decorations under orders from the Federal Reserve.
On Monday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions took one more step towards ending those policies of religious intolerance towards people of faith by announcing the formation of the Religious Liberty Task Force. The recently formed task force is designed to protect the conscience rights of Americans from being violated by government regulations.
Of course, liberals were up in arms over this equating it to an anti-LGBT force.
— Q. Allan Brocka (@allanbrocka) July 30, 2018
The Religious Liberty Task Force is fucking embarsssing. White Christians are the VERY protected in America. Let's not pretend like the law hasn't been protecting Christians denying trans patients medicine, cakes for LGBT newlyweds, and abortions for women.
— Carlos (@bIazingxmexican) July 30, 2018
— JoeMyGod (@JoeMyGod) July 30, 2018
So, the Attorney General announced a “Religious Liberty Task Force”. Trump’s task force will fight against women, LGBT people, minorities. Our Constitution means nothing, nor our history of Democracy, if we cannot protect our country from an illegitimately "elected" president!
— JGreen, M.P.A. (@jgreenSTPA) July 31, 2018
"Attorney General Jeff Sessions declared a holy war on LGBT people, LGBT equality, and LGBT rights on Monday." https://t.co/axusqlUhLJ
— FFRF (@FFRF) July 31, 2018
Sessions spoke of this growing intolerance, as well as the opinions of our Founding Fathers towards people of faith at the Department of Justice Religious Liberty Summit –
“Freedom of religion is indeed our “first freedom”—being the first listed right of our First Amendment. This has been a core American principle from the beginning. It is one of the reasons that this country was settled in the first place. The promise of freedom of conscience brought the Pilgrims to Plymouth, the Catholics to Maryland, the Quakers to Pennsylvania, the Scot-Presbyterians to the middle colonies, and Roger Williams to Rhode Island.
Each one of these groups and others knew what it was like to be hated, persecuted, outnumbered, and discriminated against. Each one knew what it was like to have a majority try to force them to deny their natural right to practice the faith they held dear. Our Founders gave religious expression a double protection in the First Amendment. Not only do we possess freedom to exercise our beliefs but we also enjoy the freedom of speech. Our Founders’ understanding of and commitment to religious freedom was truly brilliant as well as historic. It arose in large part from the principals delineated in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom—and its effective advocates: Madison and Jefferson.
These guys were ferocious. This weekend, I was rereading Gary Will’s fabulous book, Head and Heart, in which he quotes extensively from the Jefferson’s Statute, as he refers to it. I commend all of it to you; but one line stood out in particular to me, “That Almighty God hath created the mind free, and manifested His supreme will that free it shall remain, by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint.”
Of course, this is entirely consistent with another of my favorite Jefferson quotes that you will find at his memorial just across the mall from where we are today – “For I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” This is what our Founders believed. They clearly recognized that an individual’s relationship to God is a natural right and precedes the existence of the state, and is not subject to state control. These concepts were placed into our Constitution and laws and formed a national consensus that has greatly militated against religious hostility and violence—and has helped us to this day to be one of the world’s most diverse religious people.
There can be no doubt that we are stronger as a nation because of the contribution of religious Americans. Every day across America, they feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, educate our young people, and care for the sick. They do so not because the government tells them to, but because they want to. They do these things because of their faith.”
Sessions also spoke of that faith under attack and the growing hostility towards people of faith, as well as citing examples of Americans being forced by the government to violate their conscience. He cited the recent Supreme Court decision involving Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado and its owner Jack Phillips, as well as the Supreme Court decision regarding The Little Sisters of the Poor. Sessions also referenced the bigoted anti-Catholic questions asked by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., of Judge Amy Coney Barrett at her confirmation hearing last September.
“But in recent years, the cultural climate in this country—and in the West more generally—has become less hospitable to people of faith. Many Americans have felt that their freedom to practice their faith has been under attack and it’s easy to see why. We’ve seen nuns ordered to buy contraceptives. We’ve seen U.S. Senators ask judicial and executive branch nominees about dogma—even though the Constitution explicitly forbids a religious test for public office. We’ve all seen the ordeal faced so bravely by Jack Phillips. Americans from a wide variety of backgrounds are concerned about what this changing cultural climate means for the future of religious liberty in this country.”
“The Department of Justice has settled 24 civil cases with 90 plaintiffs regarding the previous administration’s wrong application of the contraception mandate to objecting religious employers. Last month, a district court in Colorado issued a permanent injunction in the case involving the Little Sisters of the Poor, a group of nuns who serve the elderly poor. This is a permanent injunction and a major victory for the Little Sisters of the Poor and religious freedom. The government has no business telling the Little Sisters that they must provide an insurance policy that violates their sincere religious beliefs.”
Sessions then announced the next steps of the Trump administration –
“Today I am announcing our next step: the Religious Liberty Task Force, to be co-chaired by the Associate Attorney General and the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Policy—Jesse and Beth.
The Task Force will help the Department fully implement our religious liberty guidance by ensuring that all Justice Department components are upholding that guidance in the cases they bring and defend, the arguments they make in court, the policies and regulations they adopt, and how we conduct our operations. That includes making sure that our employees know their duties to accommodate people of faith.”
The formation of this task force follows an October memo from Sessions broadly outlining and directing the Department of Justice to make accommodations in an effort to protect religious liberties. Sessions continuously warned of the current “dangerous” anti-religious sentiments echoing throughout America at this time and threatening the very foundation of this country – that of religious liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment.
Sessions stated – “A dangerous movement, undetected by many, is now challenging and eroding our great tradition of religious freedom. There can be no doubt. This is no little matter. It must be confronted and defeated. We have gotten to the point where courts have held that morality cannot be a basis for law; where ministers are fearful to affirm, as they understand it, holy writ from the pulpit; and where one group can actively target religious groups by labeling them a ‘hate group’ on the basis of their sincerely held religious beliefs.”
He then pledged the Department of Justice will remain in contact with religious groups across the country to continue to improve its policies and respect religious liberty.
“This administration is animated by that same American view that has led us for 242 years: that every American has a right to believe, worship, and exercise their faith in the public square,” Sessions said.
Immigrants Living On Taxpayer Dime Got Rude Awakening Thanks To Trump’s ‘New Rule’
Immigrants just got a harsh wake-up call from President Trump!
A new rule is being cooked up by the Trump administration that will send a rude awakening to immigrants living on the taxpayer dime. Trump’s new rule brings up the “public charge” in what the New York Times stated was a law that was about 100-years-old but was reworked in 1999. President Donald Trump’s new rule, which is in the works, not in action, could affect up to 1 million people in New York alone.
It has to do with immigrants using resources for welfare benefits and being listed in the realm of being a “burden” on the funds.
The New York Times stated: “But a new rule in the works from the Trump administration would make it difficult, if not impossible, for immigrants who use those benefits to obtain green cards.
New York City officials estimated that at least a million people here could be hurt by this plan, warning that the children of immigrants seeking green cards would be most vulnerable.
That’s because if applicants use any welfare benefits, even for children who are United States citizens, that could indicate they would be a burden on government resources. “What feels deeply concerning,” said Bitta Mostofi, New York City’s commissioner of immigrant affairs, “is the impact on the welfare of children, period.”
The spin they put on it makes it seem like this will leave families without food and that President Trump is going after immigrant children. What it should really be looked at is a rule that helps people become more motivated to get jobs and provide food for their families on their own, not live on the government dole while other people work 60 hours a week just to have funds for the welfare of others taken out of their check via taxes.
There are two ways to look at their new possible rules. The liberals will say it’s an attack on children and immigrants. The people with more common sense will say it’s about time that people started working for themselves. That brings up the classic debate that many of the working class are tired of hearing about – taxes and welfare. People who work for a living don’t like seeing their money given to people who refuse to work for a living.
Being on welfare because you have to is one thing. Some people are unable to work and need help. That’s different and most Americans are happy to help in that scenario. When people are on tough times, then sometimes they need a little bit of help, and that’s acceptable and nothing to be ashamed of. However, there are people who milk the system and refuse to work and that needs to be stopped at all costs. Being on welfare because you purposely choose not to work is a bad thing and any president that we have should be inclined to get people off the couch and back to being productive.
Just for reference, the public charge fact sheet states:
“Public charge has been part of U.S. immigration law for more than 100 years as a ground of inadmissibility and deportation. An individual who is likely at any time to become a public charge is inadmissible to the United States and ineligible to become a legal permanent resident. However, receiving public benefits does not automatically make an individual a public charge. This fact sheet provides information about public charge determinations to help noncitizens make informed choices about whether to apply for certain public benefits.
“Under Section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), an individual seeking admission to the United States or seeking to adjust status to permanent resident (obtaining a green card) is inadmissible if the individual “at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge.” If an individual is inadmissible, admission to the United States or adjustment of status will not be granted.
“Immigration and welfare laws have generated some concern about whether a noncitizen may face adverse immigration consequences for having received federal, state, or local public benefits. Some noncitizens and their families are eligible for public benefits – including disaster relief, treatment of communicable diseases, immunizations, and children’s nutrition and health care programs – without being found to be a public charge.
“Definition of Public Charge
“In determining inadmissibility, USCIS defines “public charge” as an individual who is likely to become “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance, or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.” See “Field Guidance on Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds,” 64 FR 28689 (May 26, 1999). In determining whether an alien meets this definition for public charge inadmissibility, a number of factors are considered, including age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education, and skills. No single factor, other than the lack of an affidavit of support, if required, will determine whether an individual is a public charge.
“Benefits Subject to Public Charge Consideration
“USCIS guidance specifies that cash assistance for income maintenance includes Supplemental Security Income (SSI), cash assistance from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program and state or local cash assistance programs for income maintenance, often called “general assistance” programs. Acceptance of these forms of public cash assistance could make a noncitizen inadmissible as a public charge if all other criteria are met. However, the mere receipt of these benefits does not automatically make an individual inadmissible, ineligible to adjust status to lawful permanent resident, or deportable on public charge grounds. See “Field Guidance on Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds,” 64 FR 28689 (May 26, 1999). Each determination is made on a case-by-case basis in the context of the totality of the circumstances.
“In addition, public assistance, including Medicaid, that is used to support aliens who reside in an institution for long-term care – such as a nursing home or mental health institution – may also be considered as an adverse factor in the totality of the circumstances for purposes of public charge determinations. Short-term institutionalization for rehabilitation is not subject to public charge consideration.
“Benefits Not Subject to Public Charge Consideration
“Under the agency guidance, non-cash benefits and special-purpose cash benefits that are not intended for income maintenance are not subject to public charge consideration. Such benefits include:
- Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases, use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, prenatal care and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care
- Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
- Nutrition programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)- commonly referred to as Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
- Housing benefits
- Child care services
- Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
- Emergency disaster relief
- Foster care and adoption assistance
- Educational assistance (such as attending public school), including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary or higher education
- Job training programs
- In-kind, community-based programs, services or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)
- Non-cash benefits under TANF such as subsidized child care or transit subsidies
- Cash payments that have been earned, such as Title II Social Security benefits, government pensions, and veterans’ benefits, and other forms of earned benefits
- Unemployment compensation
“Some of the above programs may provide cash benefits, such as energy assistance, transportation or child care benefits provided under TANF or the Child Care Development Block Grant (CCDBG), and one-time emergency payments under TANF. Since the purpose of such benefits is not for income maintenance, but rather to avoid the need for ongoing cash assistance for income maintenance, they are not subject to public charge consideration.
“Note: In general, lawful permanent residents who currently possess a “green card” cannot be denied U.S. citizenship for lawfully receiving any public benefits for which they are eligible.”
Colorado Christian Cake Shop Owner Exonerated By Supreme Court Just Got Really Bad News
This is outrageous!
Here we go again. I’m sure you are familiar with the Colorado Christian cake shop owner who just won a huge case in front of the Supreme Court this last June. Jack Phillips is the Christian baker who made history by prevailing in front of the High Court after he refused to create a custom wedding cake for a gay couple on the basis of religious beliefs. Most of America celebrated with Phillips when he won the case and it provided a glimmer of hope for religious freedom once again here in the United States.
At the time of Phillips case, the Supreme Court admonished the state’s attorney who was standing against the baker for religious intolerance. He allegedly made a number of comments that gave the court pause on First Amendment grounds. The Supreme Court issued a powerful rebuke to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission for its “religious hostility” toward Christian baker Jack Phillips. They were right to think that and it has been proven even more to be true this week as this baker just got really bad news. Phillips just filed a lawsuit in federal court late Tuesday against the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. From what I am seeing he is being set up to be taken down in a different legalistic move… this time it involves gender issues.
Phillips and his attorneys from the Alliance Defending Freedom contend that the Commission has revived its campaign against him following June’s High Court decision, singling Masterpiece Cakeshop out for disparate treatment on the basis of their religious beliefs. It’s like deja vu all over again.
“The state of Colorado is ignoring the message of the U.S. Supreme Court by continuing to single out Jack for punishment and to exhibit hostility toward his religious beliefs,” said Kristen Waggoner, who is an Alliance Defending Freedom attorney that represents Phillips. “Even though Jack serves all customers and simply declines to create custom cakes that express messages or celebrate events in violation of his deeply held beliefs, the government is intent on destroying him — something the Supreme Court has already told it not to do.”
The person allegedly behind all of this is an attorney named Autumn Scardina. She reportedly called Phillips’ shop the day the decision in his favor was rendered and asked him to make a cake celebrating a gender transition. The caller asked that the cake be blue on the outside and pink on the inside. Over several months after that, Phillips received requests for cakes featuring marijuana use, s******y explicit messages, and Satanic symbols. He’s convinced that Scardina was the one who made all of the requests to set him up for legal action.
From PJ Media:
“To forestall a second round of litigation, ADF filed suit against the commission in federal court. Jeremy Tedesco, ADF’s senior counsel and vice president of U.S. Advocacy and Administration, told PJ Media his firm would “preemptively file a lawsuit in federal court to try to stop what the commission is doing.”
“‘We think the circumstances are uniquely aligned to do that,” Tedesco explained.
“Especially since the Supreme Court ruled that the commission had treated Phillips unfairly on the basis of his religion, thus violating his right to free exercise, this follow-up round seems particularly noxious. “It seems like another round of targeting him and putting him through this very difficult process simply because he wants to be faithful in his business in what he creates through his art,” Tedesco said.
“The commission could have decided not to pursue this second case against Phillips. The ADF lawyer explained that, when a Colorado citizen thinks he or she has been discriminated against, they file a complaint with the Civil Rights Division, which then conducts an investigation and determines probable cause.
“When Autumn Scardina filed this complaint, Tedesco would have expected the civil rights commission to reject it. “After Masterpiece came down from the Supreme Court, we expected Colorado to take that into account and realize that it was a bad decision to keep targeting Jack for his religious convictions,” the lawyer explained. “Instead, they found probable cause.”
“‘He’s going to be fully investigated again, there will be hearings from an administrative law judge,” Tedesco said. “It’s restarting the entire scenario.”
“‘It’s appalling,” the lawyer declared. “It’s unconscionable that they would go after him again right on the heels of losing a case because they were openly hostile to his religious beliefs.'”
Scardina has now filed a complaint with the civil rights commission. She is alleging discrimination on the basis of gender identity. The complaint was held aside while the Supreme Court ruled in Phillips’ other case. Just three weeks after Phillips won his case, the commission issued a probable cause determination, finding there was sufficient evidence to support Scardina’s claim of discrimination. This sure looks as though it was all planned out this way. “Colorado has renewed its war against him by embarking on another attempt to prosecute him, in direct conflict with the Supreme Court’s ruling in his favor,” Phillips’ lawsuit states. “This lawsuit is necessary to stop Colorado’s continuing persecution of Phillips.”
The freedom of religion is sacrosanct in this nation as a First Amendment right. Weaponizing lawfare to take it apart is not only unconstitutional but unconscionable. I sincerely hope that Phillips prevails once more and that a more solid ruling by the Supreme Court puts an end to this form of religious bigotry.
Trump Just Achieved Major Victory Days After Omarosa Started Slanderous Attack – CONGRATS
Silly leftists... Trump always wins!
Omarosa Just Slapped With Bombshell Sexual Accusation And Trump Gets Last Laugh [Video]
Zarma just hit Omarosa hard!
Omarosa’s Best Friend Turns On Her, Goes Public With Info That Should Shut Her Up Once And For All
This won't end well for Omarosa!
Political Earthquake After Trump’s Approval Ratings Soar Among Unexpected Voting Group
This is HUGE News for President Trump...Things are changing!
Suspect From ‘Extremist Muslim’ Compound Lived In US Illegally For Over 20 years -THEY FOUND EVERYTHING!
The situation just got even more shocking.