Your Organization-WOW

You could not be more wrong in what you are doing.

America was FOUNDED AS one nation under GOD, not “God’s” Using our military as a dual edged sword to carry the Salvation message to the world is one of the most important things we are doing with our military. It unifies us. It fulfils Jesus’s teaching to go out and spread the gospel… Our Great COMMISSION no less! What you are doing with your organization is going AGAINST the word of God in your misguided belief that our man- made laws (constitutional freedom of speech and worship) TRUMPS God’s Laws/Jesus’ teaching.




(name withheld)

Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member Joan Slish

Dea(name withheld),

Your email – WOW – could not be more wrong.


“What you are doing with your organization is going AGAINST the word of God in your misguided belief that our man- made laws (constitutional freedom of speech and worship) TRUMPS God’s Laws/Jesus’ teaching.”


You could not be more wrong because Jesus tells us to obey our authorities:

“Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.” Romans 13:1-2


In other words, you are going against this teaching of Jesus to obey our laws and governing authorities and will bring judgment upon yourself.


“America was FOUNDED AS one nation under GOD.”


You could not be more wrong.


The original Pledge of Allegiance did not have “under God” in it. It was added in 1954.


In God We Trust was adopted as our nation’s Motto in 1956.


In God We Trust was first put on our paper currency in 1957.


The Treaty of Tripoli was signed at Tripoli on November 4, 1796.It was submitted to the Senate by President John Adams, receiving ratification unanimously from the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797, and signed by Adams, taking effect as the law of the land on June 10, 1797; a mere 8 years since our Constitution went into effect. If what was written was wrong in anyway, there would have been uproar. But, it passed unanimously and confirmed that America was not founded on Christianity.


Treaty of Tripoli: As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.


The Constitution reflects our founder’s views of a secular government protecting the freedom of any belief or unbelief.


The historian, Robert Middlekauff, observed, “The idea that the Constitution expressed a moral view seems absurd. There were no genuine evangelicals in the Convention, and there were no heated declarations of Christian piety.”


“The Salem witchcraft was the rock on which the theocracy shattered”. George Lincoln Burr (1857 – 1938), Professor of History and Librarian at Cornell University


Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814


“Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, then that of blindfolded fear.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787


“History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.”

Thomas Jefferson: in letter to Alexander von Humboldt, December 6, 1813

“The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.”
John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” 1787-1788

“If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution.”
George Washington, letter to the United Baptist Chamber of Virginia, May 1789

“The civil government functions with complete success by the total separation of the Church from the State.”
James Madison, 1819, Writings, 8:432, quoted from Gene Garman, “Essays In Addition to America’s Real Religion

“Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history.” 

James Madison; Monopolies, Perpetuities, Corporations, Ecclesiastical Endowments


“God has appointed two kinds of government in the world, which are distinct in their nature, and ought never to be confounded together; one of which is called civil, the other ecclesiastical government.”
Isaac Backus, An Appeal to the Public for Religious Liberty, 1773


“During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution. What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not.”

James Madison 1785 Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments


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

As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom


The Unites States is not a theocracy and according to our Founding Fathers the Constitution is not based on Christianity or biblical law.


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.


You couldn’t be more wrong.


To use our military in advancing the Great Commission 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.




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 50,000+ soldier clients are mainline Christians and we fight for them more than any other belief or non-belief.


Check out the honorable and distinguished military personnel we rely on for their expertise on religious neutrality in the military based on our laws.


Check out our Mission statement.




This includes you who think you can ignore Jesus’ teaching on obeying our authorities.


“But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.” Matthew 12:36-37


You will be held accountable for the words you wrote in this email when you don’t even know what MRFF is all about, the laws that we must obey and condemning we Christians that are a part of MRFF at the Judgment Seat of Christ.


And, yes, it is final


No one here is stopping any private citizen from fulfilling the Great Commission.


In Christ

Joan Slish

MRFF Advisory Board Member

Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member  Quentin D Collins, Colonel – Retired, PhD, ELI-MP


Dear (name withheld),

I am sorry that I cannot be gender specific as the name can be either.  I must commend you as your spelling is excellent (unlike the vast majority of critics of Mikey).  With this said, I am answering this email for Mikey as an Advisory member of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF).  First off, I am a highly decorated veteran of both the Air Force and the Army Chaplaincy and secondly, I am a born again Christian who is endorsed by a Gospel Spirit-Filled group.  With the aforementioned said, I can assure that the truest form of ministry should be service to our Service Members, their Families and our Government Employees/Contractors.  If done properly then service to and with the world will be pervasive.  What you related is a Constantine methodology if “Evangelization” that was the errancy of the “Crusades”.  I will give you the fact that a strong military force can make another force/civilian populace bend or “convert” to the overwhelming force’s position or belief.  Now let me ask you, is this the mission of our Armed Forces?  Do you want that?  Think carefully, has there been any society that has become better because of a forced theological position?  Let me answer that – no.  There have been Theocracy’s, Autocracies, Democracy’s and Dictatorships that have come and gone; but, none have prevailed by attempting to convert the masses to a Theological position.  The United States of America was founded on giving freedom from and of Religion.  Remember the people who fled government controlled Religion were the Founding Fathers.  We are best when we take the attributes of all to serve the masses – not the isolation of opposition to the betterment of the single group.  I am a Christian and I believe in serving in the role that Jesus called us to do, not the way that Religious leaders say we should.

So a simple question is this, will you win others by force, or by love and served?  When you can answer this, then you are on the path to helping others see your path.  Think about it.


Quentin D Collins, Colonel – Retired, PhD, ELI-MP

Response from MRFF Supporter

A great reply, indeed, Quentin!

Amen, and two corollaries go along with it in my mind:  
1)      What is wrong with your god that he must coerce or exert undue influence via chaplains or senior leaders in the military to convert servicemembers to believe in and follow him?  My God reaches out to people and loves them and speaks to them and gives them freewill to make their own decisions about him and how they choose to live.  

2)      My God wants chaplains and senior leaders to be people of integrity – not violating their promises to serve all without prejudice and to care for all who come to them for help.  My God wants His followers to be people who are real, honest, sincere, caring, and never exploiting or manipulative.   Instead, I have found that many of the CARL Endorser-affiliated chaplains only want to serve those who are like themselves, and that they are highly critical and even judgmental of servicemembers who are unlike these so-called “chaplains” — and that these self-proclaimed “government-paid missionaries” only respond to their servicemembers’ requests for help (if they respond at all)  to attempt to convert them.  

So it seems to me that if any are in danger of Divine judgment and wrath, it is these false chaplains making a very good living off of taxpayers by violating their oath of office and trying to coerce folks to follow their very-flawed version of God.  Seems more than a little ironic.

(name withheld)

Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member Mike Farrell

Dear (name withheld),

Thanks for expressing your opinion. It’s clear to me that your perception of our country is seriously impacted by your belief system. While I can certainly understand the strength of your conviction, I hope you will understand that yours is a position based largely on a faith that, while immensely important to you, is not shared by everyone in America.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is made up of believers of many faiths and some with no faith at all. Over 95% of those associated with our organization, as it happens, identify as Christian. But our organization neither supports nor opposes any particular view, faith or religious position. It is dedicated to the protection of the freedom of choice as regards religious belief or non-belief of the women and men in the military and strongly supports the constitutionally-based separation of church and state.

So, while scholars roundly disagree with your belief that America was founded on a religious basis, it is clear that many people of many different faiths were instrumental in its development. But, you see, they took care to protect religious freedom by ensuring that no particular faith be identified with or promoted by the U.S. Government. Given that fact, you are quite wrong in asserting that the U.S. military is being or should be used to carry a message of “salvation” to the world on behalf of Jesus. That is not and has never been the purpose the our military.

Far from “misleading our young people away from salvation,” our organization is bent on insisting that our young people and those not so young have the right to hold any belief they choose. But we also insist that no one in a position of authority in the military may impose her or his belief system on one’s comrades.

I appreciate your commitment to your own particular belief system, as I’m sure does everyone associated with the MRFF, but your assertions about our work and our intentions and your willingness to make assumptions and presume judgment on us are both wrongheaded and unappreciated.

I hope, therefore, that you will take solace in your devotion to Jesus, and in doing so remind yourself to behave in a manner that more exemplifies him.


Mike Farrell

(MRFF Board of Advisors)


With all humility.

I never “presumed” to judge. I am just letting you know the facts.

The fact is, that you definitely ARE going against Gospel teaching. Quoting any “wisdoms” of men will never be convincing to me.

The fact that not ALL people conform to my “belief system” just means that they either will come to accept Jesus as the one  Lord and Saviour at some point in the future or they will not be saved. I would say that about 50% or more of Americans would agree with me.

I never “assumed” anything. sorry.

I STATED that you had better be careful when you go against Christs teaching in favour of any man made laws, constitutions or false doctrines (that oppose Christ’s divinity). If ANYONE prays in ernest for God to reveal the truth to them, He said that He will. Fair warning.

Perhaps you should try harder.

Do you seriously believe that Muslim infiltration into all aspects of our “free” society will have no detrimental impact, and that in the end will lead to the erosion of our all the freedoms that we hold so  dear? The spiritual VOID in our military will be fully exploited by Muslims in the military until they gain the upper hand. Do you honestly believe that can never come to pass? Do you honestly believe that they will then be as tolerant towards non-muslims as we were towards them? So you think that the mass beheadings of Christians around the world is just a short -lived anomaly that in no way reflects the true motive of Islam in seeking total world domination through Jihad and by establishing Sharia in place of our national laws that govern western societies?


I stand by everything I said, as God is my witness.

Do not reply.

(name withheld)


Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member Mike Farrell

Dear (name withheld),

With a desire for clarity –

You presume that your belief system is not only correct but it provides you the right to assert your beliefs and call them facts. That is a huge presumption and an incorrect one. Whether the “wisdoms” of men, as you would have it, “will never be convincing” to you or not is utterly irrelevant. You are being very presumptuous in your judgments and arrogantly so.

As to the judgment with which you follow the first, you might check with 50% of the American people before asserting their agreement. You may be surprised to find them to be not as gullible as some. Nor as judgmental. Nor as presumptuous. Nor as hopelessly ignorant and bigoted.

Next, after assuming a position of superiority based on your assumption of having been saved due to your particular belief system, you presume to issue warnings. That involves judging, which you have done repeatedly.

After which we get to the meat of your objection, which involves your presumption that people of another belief system, which happens to be Islamic rather than Christian, are infiltrating our society to its detriment, an act that, you presume, will erode our freedoms. You further lapse into a state that resembles hysteria due to its babbling about the inevitable mass beheadings of Christians by the Muslim horde once they gain prominence enough to expose their true motive of world domination through jihad and the imposition of Sharia law.

We have more important things to do than to banter with zealots who presume and judge based on a self-satisfied sense of rectitude because of having been saved. Do enjoy it and leave the protection of our freedoms to those who truly understand freedom.

Mike Farrell

(MRFF Board of Advisors)




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

1 Comment

  1. G

    “You could not be more wrong because Jesus tells us to obey our authorities:

    “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.” Romans 13:1-2

    In other words, you are going against this teaching of Jesus to obey our laws and governing authorities and will bring judgment upon yourself.”

    Well, AP I guess you can no longer say that you will not obey the laws of nations since God establish them on his behalf.

Leave a Reply

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