You guys have it all wrong. Why not spread the Gospel? Are you afraid of something ? A military that truly has Faith in the Father, Son ,Holy Spirit. Will do their job very proficiently. They will listen to their leaders and follow through with the task they are given. If one chooses not to attend or want to not listen that’s their option. This nation was formed and founded with lots of prayer read your history . So in other words I Totally disagree with what you are attempting to do. Look at our nation , God was kicked out of schools years ago , we, our nation is behind in every thing. Third world nation’s can beat us in academics now days, Patriotism is no longer accepted in schools, no pledge of allegiance, no love of country and what we once stood for. Our nation is so worse off than it has ever been, no morals. No grounding. Parents is where it starts then schools that have upright teachers with proper morals not this left wing garbage that’s being instilled in young very impressionable minds. Look around you or you have blinders on. I totally disagree with liberal mission. 

(name withheld)

Response by MRFF Advisory Board Member John Compere

Dear (name withheld),

Thank you for your comments. You desire to promote your own version of Christianity is understandable. However, you mistakenly assume there is uniformity in Christian beliefs. This is simply not true. Christianity has over 40,000 recognized varieties world-wide with major differences on biblical versions, translations, creeds, doctrines, dogmas, rituals, liturgies, prayer, baptism, human equality, clergy gender, predestination or free will, one deity (1st Commandment monotheism) or a trinity of deities (pagan polytheism), etc.
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation represents more than 50,000 military, veterans & civilians, 96% of whom are Christian, who have requested their lawful American right to determine & enjoy their own religious beliefs without having the beliefs of others publicly forced upon them be respected & protected. This precious right is guaranteed by our US Constitution, the long established law of our land & military regulations. Our Christian clients do not want someone else’s version of Christian beliefs publicly imposed upon them and our clients of other faiths, beliefs & practices do not want any version of Christianity publicly imposed upon them. We proudly serve them to protect this fundamental constitutional liberty enjoyed by all Americans.
Attached is a rational explanation in plain language of the factual, historical & lawful relationship between our Constitution, the military & any religion, We hope you find it informative.
Most Sincerely, John
[Brigadier General John Compere, US Army (Retired); disabled American veteran (Vietnam); retired Army lawyer & judge; MRFF Advisory Board Member]



The military mission is to defend our nation against its enemies – not promote a religion. The sworn military service oath is to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States…and bear true faith and allegiance to the same” – not to any religion or its writings. The Constitution prohibits our secular government or its representatives (which includes the military) from promoting religion.


Military service, funding and pay are public whereas religion is private. Military personnel may privately practice a religion or no religion, but they may not lawfully use their military service, office or position to publicly promote private religious beliefs or impose them on other military members. This problem seldom rises when military leaders demonstrate intelligence, integrity and loyalty to the mission, oath and regulations.


Those who disrespect, disregard or deny our Constitution, their sworn service oath and military regulations subject themselves to disciplinary action. Additionally, a basic Constitution class and briefing on the legal significance of their sworn oath need to be mandatory. Those who choose not to support and defend our Constitution, honor their sworn oath or follow military regulations have the right to seek a career in the civilian sector for private pay.


The Constitution (1st Amendment) provides 3 basic religious liberties, respectively, for Americans:


  1. Freedom from religion – our secular government is prevented from “respecting ” an establishment of religion (promoting, supporting, favoring or endorsing any religion). It is our right to be free from religion imposed by the government or its representatives;


  1. Freedom of religion – our secular government is prevented from “prohibiting” free exercise of religion. It is our right to privately practice any religion or no religion provided it does not violate the rights of others. It does not include the right of the government or its representatives to impose religion on us; and


  1. Freedom to speak about religion – our secular government is prevented from “abridging” freedom of speech. It is our right to speak publicly about religion provided it does not violate the rights of others. It does not include the right of the government or its representatives to impose religious speech on us.


There should be no misunderstanding of the operative verbs in these first three clauses of the 1st Amendment. All one has to do is first read them and then read the definitions of “respecting ”, “prohibiting ” or “abridging ” in any American dictionary.


Historic separation of church and state is a fundamental liberty of free people that keeps private religion out of public government and public government out of private religion. It was clearly the intent of our Founders as confirmed by the Constitution, indisputably documented by 3 centuries of public records, acknowledged publicly by every American President since Thomas Jefferson, continuously confirmed by our courts, and permanently embedded in the established law of our land. The Constitution pointedly provides “no religious test ” shall ever be required as a qualification to any public office or public trust (Article VI). It is also significant to note there were no public prayers during the 116 days of the 1787 Constitutional Convention. These are self-evident American truths history deniers and religious revisionists intentionally ignore and deceitfully disregard.


Simply stated, we Americans have the right to our own religious or non-religious beliefs, but we must respect the right of others to determine and enjoy their beliefs (common sense clue – the same right we cherish for ourselves). This is timeless universal wisdom predating institutional religion known as the “GOLDEN RULE” and later preached by Jesus in every New Testament version (Matthew 7:12; Luke 6:31). The self-righteous obsession of radicalized religionists to publicly force their private religious beliefs on others without extending them this basic human liberty exhibits the height of hypocrisy, rejects all moral teaching and creates continuous conflict.


Unfortunately, the wisdom of the late American humorist Will Rogers still applies  – “There is no argument in the world that carries the hatred that a religious belief one does.” (The Best of Will Rogers, Bryan Sterling, M. Evans & Company, 1979, page 193).


Founder and 3rd President Thomas Jefferson publicly penned the classic confirmation – “Believing…religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God…legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion’…thus building a wall of separation between church and state.” (Jefferson Papers, Library of Congress, January 1, 1802).


The late Republican President Ronald Reagan publicly acknowledged this critical Constitutional liberty in a public speech – “We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate.” (Valley Stream, New York, October 26, 1984).


Christian evangelist Billy Graham publicly praised constitutional separation of church and state in a sermon – “We enjoy the separation of church and state and no sectarian religion has ever been and we pray God, ever will be imposed upon us.(Washington National Cathedral, 1985).


John Compere

Brigadier General, Judge Advocate General’s Corps, US Army (Retired); former Chief Judge, US Army Court of Military Review; disabled American veteran (Vietnam); Military Religious Freedom Foundation Advisory Board Member; and Texas rancher.


Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member Joan Slish



You have it all wrong.


Let me give you a history lesson.

When was the country we now know as the United States first settled?

If you said 1620 for the Pilgrims you are way off.

“The country we now know as the United States”, which I will call America for the rest of this post, was first settled by Asians thousands of years ago. When the Pilgrims landed, America already had millions of people. Like, say, Squanto, who taught them how to live in America.

The Pilgrims were not even the first white people. There were white people already living in:

  • Albany, New York
  • Sante Fe, New Mexico
  • St Augustine, Florida
  • Jamestown, Virginia
  • San Juan, Puerto Rico

There were already Jews in New Mexico, Filipinos had already arrived in California and there were blacks living in Virginia, Florida and Puerto Rico. People who would become Chicanos were already in the south-west. All here before the Pilgrims came over on the Mayflower.

In Canada, just so you know, there white people already living in Nova Scotia and Quebec and English-speaking people in Newfoundland.

If you look at the European settlement of America in the 1610s and 1620s, the Pilgrims do not stick out:

  • 1610 – Kecoughtan, Virginia – English
  • 1610 – Santa Fe – Spanish
  • 1615 – Fort Nassau – Dutch
  • 1620 – Plymouth Colony – English
  • 1622 – Province of Maine – English
  • 1623 – Portsmouth – English
  • 1623 – Stage Point – English
  • 1623 – Dover – English
  • 1623 – Pannaway – English
  • 1623 – New Castle – English
  • 1623 – Fort Nassau – Dutch
  • 1624 – Governors Island – Dutch
  • 1625 – New Amsterdam – Dutch
  • 1626 – Salem – English

Why do we go back to 1620? Thanksgiving and the false narrative about it.


It is sad and it is so wrong that some people have a revisionist mentality to believe that America was built on Christian principles. Morals are universal no matter what religion you follow. I know atheists who have the same fruit of the Spirit (love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control… ‘Galatians 25:22-23) placed upon their hearts and live it better than the Christians do.


What Christian principles built America?


Was it the Puritans that sought “refuge” here because of the intolerance towards them in England and Holland because they wanted to “purify” the Church of England and failed, yet they themselves were intolerant of other sects of Christianity, other religions and those of no faith? Was it the taxation of the people to support churches? Was it the very strict adherence to the bible as infallible? Was it the punishments that were meted out according to the bible? Or was it because they slaughtered over 600 Pequot “heathen” Indians with the help of the Mohegan and Narraganset Indians called the “Pequot War” where they burnt many Indians alive? Is this what America is built on?

“William Bradford, in his famous History of the Plymouth Plantation, celebrated the Pequot massacre:

“Those that scraped the fire were slaine with the sword; some hewed to peeces, others rune throw with their rapiers, so as they were quickly dispatchte, and very few escapted. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fyer (burned alive), and the streams of blood quenching the same, and horrible was the stincke and sente there of, but the victory seemed a sweete sacrifice, and they gave the prayers thereof to God, who had wrought so wonderfully for them, thus to inclose their enemise in their hands, and give them so speedy a victory over so proud and insulting an enimie.”

This is sick!

How do you slaughter a whole tribe because of the misdeeds of a few, in the name of Jesus?

Or was America built on punishments such as the stocks (where the legs are placed); the pillory (where the head and hands are placed while standing and people threw stones and garbage at them and they soiled themselves while being there for so long); the whipping post; dunking; trying kids are young as 8 as adults; being punished for marrying outside of the white race and if you had a bi-racial child, it was placed into servitude until the age of 31; forced to go to church under penalty; and the most egregious – the Salem Witch Trials in 1692-1693?

“More than once it has been said, too, that the Salem witchcraft was the rock on which the theocracy shattered.” George Lincoln Burr (2)

Or was it the Toleration Acts?

The Toleration Acts of 1645 and 1647 while we are still under English control and less than 30 years from the landing of the Mayflower.

On Oct. 27, 1645, the English House of Commons ordered “that the inhabitants of the Bermudas, and of all other American plantations now or hereafter planted, should, without molestation or trouble, have and enjoy the liberty of conscience in matters of God’s worship.”

In 1647 Parliament passed another act, allowing all persons to meet for religious duties and ordinances in a fit place, provided the public peace was not disturbed.

The Toleration Act of 1647 in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

At a General Court of Elections, held at Portsmouth, beginning May 19, 1647, for ” the colony and province of Providence,” after adopting many acts and orders concerning the government and for the punishment of crimes, it was decreed that ” These are the laws that concern all men, and these are the penalties for the transgression thereof, which by common consent are ratified and established throughout the whole colony; and otherwise than thus, what is herein forbidden, all men may walk as their consciences persuade them, everyone in the name of his God.” This act of toleration was so broad and absolute that it would include Christian, Jew, Mohammedan, Parsee, Buddhist, or pagan.

The Toleration Act of 1649 in Maryland Colony.

The Maryland toleration act (1649) was the joint work of Roman Catholics and Protestants. The General Assembly at that time was composed of eight Roman Catholics and sixteen Protestants—three councilors, and five burgesses were Roman Catholics, and the governor (William Stone), six councilors, and nine burgesses were Protestants. The act did not establish absolute toleration.

The General Assembly of Maryland, convened at St. Mary’s, April 2, 1649, after enacting severe punishments for the crime of blasphemy, and declaring that certain penalties should be inflicted upon any one who should call another a sectarian name of reproach, adopted the declaration that ” whereas the enforcing of conscience in matters of religion hath frequently fallen out to be of dangerous consequence in those commonwealths where it has been practiced, and for the more quiet and peaceable government of this province, and the better to preserve mutual love and unity among the inhabitants, . . . no person or persons whatsoever within this province, or the islands, posts, harbors, creeks, or havens thereunto belonging, professing to believe in Jesus Christ, shall from henceforth be anyways troubled or molested or discountenanced for or in respect of his or her religion, nor in the free exercise thereof, within the province or the islands thereunto belonging, nor any way compelled to the belief or exercise of any other religion against his or her conscience.”

All Christian religions were accepted.

Virginia Statute for Establishing Religious Freedom was signed on January 19, 1786 and was the forerunner for the First Amendment to the Constitution.

SECTION I. That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

SEC. 16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of ALL to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.

Or is it the Constitution that built America?

Jefferson wrote the Statute of Religious Freedom, whose preamble indicted state religion, noting that “false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time” have been maintained through the church-state. To “compell a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical.”


In his Notes on Virginia (1782), Jefferson wrote: “Millions of innocent men, women and children since the introduction of Christianity have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned. Yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites. . .”


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.”


“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


We are defenders of the Constitution (Separation of Church and State), Supreme Court rulings and the UCMJ.


“…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


To entangle the military with religion is a violation of the Constitution, Reynolds v. U.S., Lemon v. Kurtzman, the Lemon Test and Parker v. Levy.


Jesus did believe in liberalism. He healed ALL, He fed the hungry and he hung around with sinners.


Matthew 22:36-40

“Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”


Jesus left us His example of who is going to heaven and who isn’t in Matthew 25:31-41.


“When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels…”


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 50,200+ soldier clients are mainline Christians and we fight for them more than any other belief or non-belief.


We also have many honorable and distinguished military personnel, whom we rely on for their expertise on religion in the military, on our Board and Advisory Board.


Check out our Mission Statement


What you wrote in your email is a desire for America to be a Theocracy. It never was and never will be.


Joan Slish

MRFF Advisory Board Member

Response by MRFF Advisory Board Member Mike Farrell


Hi (name withheld),

Nope, not afraid of anything. No one here is opposing your right to “spread the Gospel.” In your case, were you in the military, that would be a right we’d be sure to protect. But you see, in the military, which is part of the government, one is only free to “spread the Gospel” on her or his own private time. Because of the First Amendment’s protection of free choice of belief or non-belief, one cannot try to push one belief system over others because it violates the separation of church and state.

Your belief system holds that “a military that truly has Faith in the Father, Son, Holy Spirit… will do their job very proficiently.” That may be so in some part of the world or in your imagination, but in America everyone doesn’t believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, so it can’t work here.

You see, much as it pains some people, in America one is free to believe as you do or not, and each person’s choice of belief or non-belief is just as important as yours. And the same is true of any other aspect of that person’s citizenship.

You have lumped a lot of what you perceive as social problems together under the assumption that they’re all the result of one thing: not believing as you do. Hard as it may be for you to understand, it is exactly that kind of narrow mindedness that causes the problems you list, not the the fact that some lack your perception of God or godliness.

It’s a shame that you can’t understand that people who are not your kind of Christian, people who may well be believers but just not the kind that needs to shove it in everyone’s face or demand that everyone bow down in their chosen way, can be just as decent and loving and compassionate and Christlike as you seem to think you are. And, like it or not, those who believe in Allah or Yahweh or Krishna or The Great Spirit and those who believe there is no god or there are many gods are also just as good and decent and thoughtful as are you. Maybe even more so.

Your  idea about taking the blinders off might a good self-prescription. Think about it.

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. Joshua Rownd

    Joan Slish, talk about revisionist history, this is all a load CRAP! Where in the hell did you find this crap especially regarding Jews in New Mexico, OMG let me instruct you on some Jewish history from their own history. I think Jews would know when Jews first came to the United States –

    Julian Abagond, who the hell is he, a nobody and leave it to a black person to change history of the United States.

    “I know atheists who have the same fruit of the Spirit (love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control… ‘Galatians 25:22-23) placed upon their hearts and live it better than the Christians do.” Joan Slish, This is nothing but pure heresy Joan, you have become a pure apostate. Nobody who does not have the Holy Spirit residing in them can have the fruit of the Spirit, that is why it is called the “fruit of the Spirit.”

    I think it is time for the men in the white coats to come pay a visit at your home, where ever that is, but I know they can find mentally disturbed people easily,

  2. G

    JR, how do you know that Ms. Slish is a pure apostate?

    “Nobody who does not have the Holy Spirit residing in them can have the fruit of the Spirit, that is why it is called the “fruit of the Spirit.””

    So what does that mean for millions of people who are non-Christians like Muslims, Hindus, etc?

    “Where in the hell did you find this crap especially regarding Jews in New Mexico,”

    Maybe she came across some information that Jewish historians have not come across. One person stated that history is like an iceberg. You only see 1% of it on the surface while the rest of it is beneath the water. People are running across more and more information that have been declassified or are discovering information that were not classified as top secret; however, were hidden away in the archives for decades.

    Nick Turse’s book Kill Anything that Moves is a perfect example. His information came from the 30 boxes of reports from the Vietnam War Crimes Working Group, and those documents were not labeled as top secret; however, they were put in The National Archives Building where they went undiscovered for nearly 30 years.

  3. Connie

    JR – your racism is showing as is your second class education. Let me guess, you learned history from the Gothard lessons for home schooling followed by advanced studies with David Barton?

    History books are written by the victors who erase any facts which contradict the narrative that the victors are only steps away from being Gods. Real history is messy.

    You seem a bit overwrought in your comment. Perhaps you should rest and recover your composure.

  4. G

    “Jews are very meticulous with their history,”

    Yeah, and how much of that recorded history was destroy by the Germans, the Romans, the Babylonians, etc.

    “We have 3,000 years of recorded Jewish history going back to their beginning with Abraham,”

    Are you referring to the Bible, JR? Because the Bible doesn’t give us any historical information about Israeli society back then.

    “The idea that there were Jews in New Mexico is as stupid as the Mormons believing Jesus visited the United States to the early Mormons.”

    Yeah, JR, and you have a lot of people being stupid that single payer heath care doesn’t or can’t work, or that the Jews along with the Communists are plotting to take over the world or believing that if you want to learn about math, biology, science, chemistry, physics, and engineering, the Bible contains all the knowledge that you need to know

  5. Joshua Rownd

    I can guarantee to you that the Jews are not plotting to take over the world. I know where that comes from, a book called -“The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” which has been proved time and time again a complete forgery. However, when Christ returns, He will do a hostile takeover of the planet, and will reign over all nations and kingdoms from His throne in Jerusalem.

  6. G

    “I can guarantee to you that the Jews are not plotting to take over the world.”

    Yeah, JR, you tell that to the people who still think that the Jews are going to take over the world.

  7. Peter Zimmerman

    Joshua, my man,

    I’m an American Jew, a retired Navy officer, professor, and I just happened to grow up in New Mexico, like Mikey but somewhat earlier. There is no question that Spanish Jews camped to New Mexico with the Conquistadores. Many of them were Maranos, Jews forced by the Spanish Inquisition, a group of Christians determined to get rid of non-Christians in Spain. To save their lives Maranos converted to Catholicism while secretly remaining faithful to their heritage.

    If you venture into the Manzano Mountains south and east of Albuquerque you will find villages where the citizens still follow customs assuredly Jewish in origin, even if those villagers have, over four centuries and more, lost the knowledge of their origin. While there are few, if any, direct descendants of those Maranos still practicing Judaism consciously, the traces remain.

    Indeed, growing up I knew Jews with Hispanic names who proudly traced their ancestry back to the earliest days of the city of Santa Fe.

    There were Jews in New Mexico before there were English settlers in Massachusetts or my native commonwealth of Virginia.

    And, of course, Judaism came to the American Southwest in the first waves of Anglo migration there. The congregation in which I was Bar Mitzvah dates to the days of the New Mexico Territory. Jews have served as Territorial governors of New Mexico, and justices of the state’s Supreme Court since the beginnings.

    Sure, the majority of my co-religionists in the USA came from Europe in the nineteenth and twentieth century. But the territory of the USA was first settled by Europeans in the Southwest, long before the East Coast saw its first Europeans,

    In your case a lack of learning is a dangerous thing.


Leave a Reply

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