You are so silly, creating a fake emergency to sell cheap bricks at 25 bucka a piece! Were they donated? Con artists!!

(name withheld)


If Jihadists threatened to overthrow our military, would you call it a “fake emergency”?  If not, why?  We’re fighting against a Christian overthrow of our government.  I’m sure your nationalist zeal is blinding you from reason, but do please try to think a bit from time to time.  While it will pain you at first, like any good exercise it takes time to develop mental strength.

Good luck in your journey to mental adulthood,

Blake A. Page
Military Religious Freedom Foundation
Special Assistant to the President
Director of US Army Affairs

Military Religious Foxtrot Foxtrot,<
What your organization, and you as individuals, are doing is working to restrict the freedom of all members of the Armed Forces. As typical Atheist Liberals, you want everyone else to do and believe what you do without regard for anyone else’s beliefs but your own. You want to deny the constitutional rights of other Americans and force them to live under your restrictions on their liberty and freedom. You are Wrong!
Amendment one to the U.S. Constitution states “ Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…..”
The playing of taps, military chaplains, prayers by service members, bibles, bibles at POW/MIA tables, Christian rites in a military funeral, military chapels, Christian crosses or Jewish Star of David, an officer invoking God in a speech, Military personnel praying on the battlefield, military personnel attending church services or seeking out a chaplain of their own free will, etc. etc. etc. ARE NOT examples of congress making a law respecting an establishment of Religion.  I know it and you know it! This is logic and common sense.
Speaking of religion, the First Amendment states “the Congress shall not prevent the free exercise thereof…”
So there we have it. Our constitutional guarantee to our freedom of religion and the right to enjoy the free exercise of our religion.
The government cannot deny us from exercising our freedom of religion wether it’s in the military, fire department, police department, or our local church or synagogue and neither can you!
You liberal anti-American freedom atheists will not take our religious freedom or any of our other freedoms away from us. Never!
Your fall back “Seperation of church and state” is nowhere in the Constitution or the declaration of independence. It is not law. The Declaration of Independence does state that we “are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. “  This doesn’t mean you Mickey and MRFF. You do not tell us what to do and what rights we can and cannot have. But this is typical of liberals, you try and tell everyone else what to do and you want us to live under your rule. Never happen.
If you want to be atheists you have the freedom to do so. If people want to believe in God and enjoy the free exercise of their religion, they have the right to do so and nothing you will ever say or do will stop that. We do not live under your twisted view. The constitution guarantees us our freedom and you will not take it away.
Military personnel, or anyone else enjoying their freedom of religion is not congress making a law respecting a religion. So get over yourselves. You have zero common sense and are completely illogical.
My son is an Officer in the U.S. Marine Corps. We have many friends in the Navy and Marine Corps. You will not take way their rights. I served 35 years in Police and Fire. You will not take away our freedoms either. You will not take away the rights of the people, they are guaranteed by Congress.
Mickey and the rest of the individuals in the MRFF are a disgrace. You are wrong and twisted. You will not take our rights. We will fight you all the way, and then some more.
(name withheld)

Dear (name withheld) –


I am writing in response to your February 29, 2016 email to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (“MRFF”).  You assert many arguments in your email and I hope I can address each of them.


First, MRFF does not seek to restrict the freedom of service members, nor are we “Atheist Liberals.”  In fact, over 96% of our clients are Christians, as are many of our board members and volunteers – so you may want to do your research before making any future allegations.  Our mission is to protect the religious freedom of all soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, cadets, and veterans.  Contrary to your claim that we “want everyone else to do and believe what [we] do,” it is actually fundamentalist “Christian” military superiors who want those under their command to believe what they do, in blatant violation of the First Amendment and military regulations.  We do not want anyone to believe (or not believe) in any particular religious faith.  We fight only to uphold the U.S. Constitution.


On that note, I will address your argument that the First Amendment only prohibits Congress from making laws establishing religion.  Although you correctly quote the Establishment Clause, the Supreme Court has consistently held that any action by any state actor – including the military or any branch thereof – that endorses a particular religion over other religions, or religion over non-religion, constitutes an unlawful establishment of religion.  Therefore, such action violates the Establishment Clause if any one of the following is shown: (1) its purpose is not secular; (2) its principal/primary effect either advances or inhibits religion; or (3) it fosters an excessive entanglement with religion.  Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971).


Including a Bible in a display to honor service members has no secular purpose, its primary effect is clearly to advance religion (specifically Christianity), and it fosters an excessive entanglement between the military and religion.  Thus, it violates the Establishment Clause.  This is not a matter of “forcing” others to “live under [our] restrictions,” but a matter of ensuring that the mandates of the Constitution and military regulations are obeyed.


You are correct that the First Amendment also protects the free exercise of religion.  MRFF has no objection to any service member practicing Christianity or any other religion – they have every right to attend church, pray on the battlefield or anywhere else, seek the counsel of a Chaplain, carry and read the Bible, and even share their beliefs with others.  However, the freedom to exercise religion does not include the right to force their views upon others.  The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause create a balance – thus, simultaneously providing for the freedom of religion AND the freedom from religion, contrary to your claim that the two goals cannot exist together.  Including a Bible in a POW/MIA display is neither necessary to honor service members, nor necessary for individual service members to exercise their Christian faith.  Its sole purpose and effect is to proclaim Christianity superior to all other faiths or no faith.


Your claim that the separation of church and state is nowhere in the Constitution is simply false.  The Establishment Clause creates a clear wall separating religion from the matters of government.  While those exact words are not included in the Constitution, they were used by Thomas Jefferson to express an understanding of the intent and function of the First Amendment in his January 1, 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut: “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 and State.”


The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that Jefferson’s words “may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment.”  Reynolds v. U.S., 98 U.S. 145 (1879).  See also Everson v. Board of Edu., 330 U.S. 1 (1947) (“In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state.”).  As you can see, the separation of church and state is plainly a primary constitutional doctrine.


MRFF does not attempt to tell anyone “what to do and what rights we can and cannot have.”  The Constitution and the case law interpreting it dictate our rights, as do military regulations.  These mandates are not part of our “twisted view,” but the view of the Founders of this great country.  We work tirelessly to ensure that the brave men and women who sacrifice so much to protect our rights are also guaranteed their constitutional rights – we protect our protectors.  We do not seek to ban free religion, but seek to protect it.  The fact that you only want to protect the freedom to practice YOUR religion is entirely your problem.


We at MRFF, including our founder, Mikey Weinstein, are fully educated in constitutional law and know exactly what rights are guaranteed.  You, however, cannot even correctly name the person you claim to be a disgrace (it’s Mikey – not “Mickey”), let alone “fight [us] all the way, and then some more.”  If you would like to challenge us on constitutional issues, I sincerely suggest you learn something about the Constitution first.




Tobanna Barker

MRFF Legal Affairs Coordinator





Share this page:

Commenter Account Access

  • Register for a commenter account
    (Not required to post comments, but will save you time if you're a regular commenter)
  • Log in using your existing account
  • Click here to edit your profile and change your password
  • All comments are subject to our Terms of Use

No Comments

Start the ball rolling by posting a comment on this article!

Leave a Reply

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