WTF?

Just curious, Does Mr. Weinstein go after muslims who want to wear a burka in the Military? Mr. Weinstein and others in
your horseshit organization are horrible,rotten,evil bastards. The MRF,SPLC, and ACLU are the alphabet soup of scumbag
Anti-American,Anti-Christian,Communist pieces of excrement. But during this joyous season I would just like to spread some Holiday Cheer and wish you all A VERY MARRY CHRISTMAS. Now you can crawl back into your safe space and let the
rest of us celebrate.

(name withheld)


Response from MRFF Founder and President Mikey Weinstein

 

hi there, sport…actually it’s spelled “MERRY” not “MARRY”, sugar…..please don’t give up on trying for that G.E.D., chump……also, maybe invest on buying “Hooked on Phonics”??…your lack of quality education is breathtaking!!  🙁   …hey, I think you’re late for a book burning aren’t you, jack??!!….Mikey Weinstein…..Pres. and Founder, MRFF


You’re a pathetic piece of shit.I despise you.
(name withheld)

Response from MRFF Founder and President Mikey Weinstein

ohhh tut, tut, tut….did I hit a nerve little cupcake??….let me get you a hanky…….seems you can dish the shit out but can’t take any of it back….

Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member Joan Slish
Dear (name withheld),
We are extremely disgusted by the way Christian organizations and the media dupe people by lies, omissions and distortions.
 
Did they tell you all of the laws that are broken by elevating the Christian religion above all others in the military? Nope, they never mention them because then you would know the truth.
 
Mikey does not run the MRFF by himself. 
 
We are neither an atheist organization nor are we anti-Christian. Mikey is Jewish (and prays to the same Father we do 3 times a day) and 80% of the Board, Advisory Board, volunteers and supporters (300 in total) of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) are Christians. In fact, 96% of our 48,300+ soldier clients are mainline Christians and we fight for them more than any other belief or non-belief.
 
As defenders of the Constitution we fight for the separation of church and state.
 
“…but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” (Article I, III)
This means that from the President to Congress to the military – no one’s job is based on their religion. 
 
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion (Establishment Clause), or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (Free Exercise Clause).”(First Amendment)
 
The Establishment Clause means that you cannot favor one religion over another even though it is in the majority. This clause respects the RIGHTS of all religions. Our military is SECULAR and there are people of other faiths that don the uniform that love this country. 
 
The Free Exercise Clause (which is subservient to the Establishment Clause) means that our soldiers are free to exercise any religion they want or no religion at all but cannot elevate one God above others.
 
“Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person’s life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the “wall of separation between church and state,” therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.” Thomas Jefferson, to the Virginia Baptists (1808) ME 16:320. 
 
This is his second known use of the term “wall of separation,” here quoting his own use in the Danbury Baptist letter.
 
This wording of the original was several times upheld by the Supreme Court as an accurate description of the Establishment Clause. 
 
“Jefferson’s concept of “separation of church and state” first became a part of Establishment Clause jurisprudence in Reynolds v. U.S., 98 U.S. 145 (1878). In that case, the court examined the history of religious liberty in the US, determining that while the constitution guarantees religious freedom, “The word ‘religion’ is not defined in the Constitution. We must go elsewhere, therefore, to ascertain its meaning and nowhere more appropriately, we think, than to the history of the times in the midst of which the provision was adopted.” The court found that the leaders in advocating and formulating the constitutional guarantee of religious liberty were James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. Quoting the “separation” paragraph from Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists, the court concluded that, “coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured.
 
In 1878 “separation of church and state” became part of the Establishment Clause BY LAW.
 
The Supreme Court heard the Lemon v. Kurtzman case in 1971 and ruled in favor of the Establishment Clause.
 
Subsequent to this decision, the Supreme Court has applied a three-pronged test to determine whether government action comports with the Establishment Clause, known as the Lemon Test:
 
Government action violates the Establishment Clause unless it: 
1. has a significant secular (i.e., non-religious) purpose, 
2. does not have the primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion 
3. does not foster excessive entanglement between government and religion
 
Parker v. Levy: 
 “This Court has long recognized that the military is, by necessity, a specialized society separate from civilian society… While the members of the military are not excluded from the protection granted by the First Amendment, the different character of the military community and of the military mission requires a different application of those protections. … The fundamental necessity for obedience, and the consequent necessity for imposition of discipline, may render permissible within the military that which would be constitutionally impermissible outside it… Speech [in any form] that is protected in the civil population may nonetheless undermine the effectiveness of response to command.  If it does, it is constitutionally unprotected.” (Emphasis added) Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733, 1974
 
AFI (Air Force Instruction) 1-1, Section 2.12:
 2.12. Balance of Free Exercise of Religion and Establishment Clause. Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for their own free exercise of religion, including individual expressions of religious beliefs, and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion. They must ensure their words and actions cannot reasonably be construed to be officially endorsing or disapproving of, or extending preferential treatment for any faith, belief, or absence of belief. 
 
To elevate and promote the Christian God above all others is in violation of the Constitution (Establishment Clause), Reynolds v. U.S., Lemon v. Kurtzman, the Lemon Test, Parker v. Levy and AFI 1-1, Section 2.12.
 
When the military oversteps the laws in effect concerning religious neutrality, we step in to protect ALL soldiers’ religious freedoms.
 
When we call out a transgression of our laws, they acquiesce because they know they will lose in a court of law. It’s not because of us but because of our laws that are in effect for all government entities.
 
If the military would obey the laws mentioned above – according to the oath they took to defend the Constitution – we wouldn’t be having this fight.
 
Check out our Mission Statement
 
Check out the honorable and distinguished military personnel we rely on for their expertise regarding religious neutrality, who you call horrible, rotten, evil bastards and scumbag Anti-American, Anti-Christian, Communist pieces of excrement.
 
And may you and yours have a VERY “MARRY” CHRISTMAS, too!
 
In Christ,
 
Joan Slish
MRFF Advisory Board Member

 Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member John Compere

Brigadier General, Judges Advocate General’s Corps, US Army (Retired)
American disabled veteran (Vietnam)
Dear (name withheld),
The MRFF represents over 48,000 patriotic military, veteran & civilian clients, 96% of whom are Christians, who have requested that their constitutional freedom from government imposed religion religion be respected & protected. We proudly support & assist them to protect that precious American liberty.
 
Attached you will find a rational explanation in plain language about our Constitution, any religion & the military. We hope you find it informative.
 
Ironically, the most hate-filled opposition to our representation of fellow Americans comes from radicalized fundamentalist Christians who resort to filthy name-calling because they cannot address issues with intelligence or integrity.
 
There is no argument in the world that carries the hatred that a religious belief one does.” – WILL ROGERS (American Humorist).
 
John Compere
Brigadier General, Judges Advocate General’s Corps, US Army (Retired)
American disabled veteran (Vietnam)
MRFF Advisory Board Member

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 *

*