american traditions

From: (name withheld)
Subject: american traditions
Date: July 26, 2018 at 9:18:15 PM MDT

 

Hey little worm, we saw a blog that reflects muslims in the military and your compassion for them…i was
looked at the wrong way and threatened, while in the service, by some muslim fellow soldiers.  We told them America was founded by christian patriots and that revisionists are trying to change that to be “politically correct” .
 
FUCK political correctness and your web site.
My group will open your eyes, one way or the other , you are a traitor and will hang for it .
(name withheld)

Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member Joan Slish
On Jul 26, 2018, at 10:56 PM, Joan Slish  wrote:

 

(name withheld),

I’d like to know where you read that Mikey likes only Muslims. This is patently false.

You wrote: “My group will open your eyes, one way or the other, you are a traitor and will hang for it.”
This comes across as a death threat that we take very seriously.

I hope to inform you of the truth about us in able to change your mind.

The news deliberately leaves out pertinent Supreme Court rulings and UCMJ regulations in order to push an agenda of Christian supremacy in America.
The Bible on the Missing Man’s table has not always been there.
“Actually, the original tradition of the table was started by the River Rats, the group of Vietnam combat pilots who began this tradition in 1967, did NOT include a Bible, and neither does the American Legion’s version, which sticks to the original tradition. The Bible wasn’t added until over three decades later, when the VFW Ladies Auxiliary published a new version in a 1999 issue of their magazine that added a Bible. So, if you want to honor the original tradition, it would NOT have a Bible.”Chris Rodda Research Director for MRFF
Mikey and MRFFare 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 (420 in total) of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) are Christians. In fact, 96% of our 56,700+ soldier clients are mainline Christians and we fight for them more than any other belief or non-belief.
We also have many distinguished and honorable military members (including Christian Chaplains and religious leaders) on our Board and Advisory Board whom we rely on for their expertise on religion in the military.
Check out our mission statement.
The revision of our history is from those who want to claim that we were founded as a Christian nation.
Here is the true history of our country. Check the references I quote and you will see that they are accurate.
Separation of Church and State is prominent in the First Amendment to our Constitution.
Here’s the backdrop for the First Amendment of the Constitution.
When Virginia was founded it established the Anglican Church as the state’s official religion based on the state sponsored Church of England. In order to hold any official position in the Virginia government you must be a member of the Anglican Church.
All citizens of Virginia, regardless of their religious affiliation, had to pay taxes to support the Anglican churches throughout the state. The Quakers, Baptists, Presbyterians and Methodists fought this by petitions but were ignored.
Jefferson felt that to make anyone pay a tax to support the Anglican Church or any church was wrong and in 1777 penned the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. After becoming Governor of Virginia in 1779, he brought the bill – known as Bill No. 82 – before the Virginia Assembly. It didn’t become law until 1785.
The following paragraph from the Virginia Statute is the basis for the First Amendment. It didn’t need this whole paragraph written out in the amendment because the people of that time understood what it meant.
“We the General Assembly of Virginia do enact that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.”
This bill gave the people freedom FROM religion in all aspects of their lives. No longer were they forced to attend religious services, pay taxes to the state to fund the state sanctioned religion or kept from holding a job in the government.
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 byPresidentJohnAdams, receiving ratificationunanimouslyfrom 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 yearssince 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
“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
Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

“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, EcclesiasticalEndowments
“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)
TheEstablishment Clausemeans 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.
TheFree 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 ofthemselvesand 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 ClausejurisprudenceinReynolds v. U.S.,98 U.S. 145 (1878). In that case, thecourtexamined 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 Clauseby law.
The Supreme Court heard theLemon v. Kurtzmancase in 1971 and ruled in favor of theEstablishment Clause.
Subsequent to this decision, the Supreme Court has applied a three-pronged test to determine whether government action comports with theEstablishment Clause, known as theLemon 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 place the Christian god above all others is in violation of the Separation of Church and State codified in the First Amendment by Reynolds v. U.S.; Lemon v. Kurtzman; the Lemon Test; Parker v. Levy and AFI 1-1, Section 2.12.
COL Stacy J Huser USAF AFGSC 90 MW/CC wrote:

I’m grateful they [MRFF’s current 36 USAF clients at F.E. Warren AFB] felt comfortable contacting you for your advocacy.  Our chaplains are purchasing a generic “book of faith” on Thursday and will let me know when that book is expected to arrive.  Until it arrives, I’ve asked them to rotate the book placed on the table (rotate it through various faiths).  Yesterday they placed the Book of Mormon on the table.  I will contact you again when our permanent “book of faith” is on display.

Thank you again for taking care of our Airmen.  One of my focus areas is increasing a sense of belonging for all our Airmen a large part of that effort is ensuring that the religious and non-religious feel included and cared for.

Take care –

I understand your anger after you read the article citing we only care for Muslims, which is not true. It also left out Supreme Court rulings and Air Force regulations that must be followed.

I hope this clears up the false story you read.

Joan Slish
MRFF Advisory Board Member

Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member John Compere

On Jul 27, 2018, at 7:43 AM, John Compere wrote:

Dear (name withheld),
 
For your information, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation is an American non-profit constitutional rights organization (composed of more than 80% Christians) dedicated solely to ensuring the right of our military to freedom of religion (to which all Americans are entitled under our American Constitution). MRFF represents over 56,000 military men & women (96% of whom are Christians) who requested MRFF assistance in protecting their lawful right to determine, enjoy & practice their own beliefs without unwanted & uninvited interference. When requested, we represent military members & will continue to do so. For this advocacy, MRFF has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize 7 times.
 
It is a sad commentary on our humanity when bigoted religious hypocrites, some of whom claim to be Christians, hurl hatred at fellow Americans who understand & respect our historic secular founding, secular constitution, secular government & secular military. Willful ignorance is difficult to dissuade when infected with apathy, acrimony & arrogance. MRFF endeavors to enlighten history deniers & revisionists & will continue to do so.
 
It has been my experience that a man who resorts to hate-filled & nasty name-calling does so because he cannot address a subject with intelligence & integrity. Your malicious message only reflects on yourself.
 
American philosopher Mark Twain wisely wrote “There is no argument in the world that carries the hatred that a religious belief one does.”
 
Most Sincerely,
Brigadier General John Compere, US Army (Retired)
Disabled American Veteran (Vietnam)
MRFF Advisory Board Member

Response from MRFF Advisory Board Member Mike Farrell

On Jul 27, 2018, at 6:32 PM, Mike  wrote:

Hi (name withheld),

I don’t know what blogs you read, but you might want to choose more carefully. Repeating some of this stuff can make
you sound like a fool. For example, and just for the record, Mikey’s ‘compassion’ is for everyone, even people like you.

If some fellow soldiers threatened you, that should have been taken up within the unit command. Doesn’t matter what

religion they practice.

But your story isn’t very clear. You say you were “looked at and threatened” by some soldiers who happened to be Muslim,

and then “We told them…” Who is “we”? Had they threatened someone else? Did they do so out of the blue or had there
been some provocation? You see, you don’t paint a very clear picture here.

Anyway, you go on. Instead of dealing with whatever the threat was appropriately, you say you and apparently others “told
them America was founded by Christian patriots”… (Now see, here’s a problem: you’re wrong about that)… you go on “and
that revisionists (whoever and whatever they are) are trying to change that to be politically correct.”

So by now the people who looked at you and threatened you must have been as confused as I am in reading your story.
Who are the revisionists and what are they revising? If they’re correcting your misstatement about the Founders, good

for them. It’s a good idea to be correct, especially when arguing or debating. Otherwise you sound stupid.

I’m not sure, by the way, what you find so frightening about correctness, political or otherwise. Being “politically correct”
has taken a bit of a beating for a while now, mostly from people who are stuck in the past. But it’s really only a matter of being considerate and polite about how we relate to others. You did mention ‘compassion’, for example, but I suspect you didn’t
mean it as a compliment.

You see, judging from that and your last couple of lines, relating properly to others is not high on your personal agenda.

I’m not sure who your “group” is. Would you care to elaborate? I don’t know too many people who would object to having
their eyes opened to a new way to look at things, but “one way or the other” sounds like a threat. And calling someone a
traitor, especially someone you don’t know and don’t understand, is the act of a fool. But I said that before. Let me amend
that to idiot. And then tagging it with the statement that this person you neither know nor understand “will hang for it,” is
clearly a threat, one that puts you in dire legal jeopardy, I would think.

Sorry, (name withheld).

Mike Farrell
(MRFF Board of Advisors)

From: (name withheld)
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2018 4:40 PM
To: Joan Slish
Subject: Re: american traditions

 

Now that reading was very good and very well put together.

I abstain from any further comments, good or bad.

 

Best,

(name withheld)


 

 

 

 

 

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

9 Comments

  1. Grey One talks sass

    I love Pastor Joan and I’ve never met the lady. From Bless your Socks Off to her endless effort to educate the unwilling, she lives her faith. It makes me feel good knowing she exists in this world.

    As for the letter writer, it’s a dangerous time to be issuing threats of violence. I hope they reconsider their rash and hateful thoughts.

  2. Delta One

    I would like to open a can of whoop-ass on the letter writer. It does not represent our Military organization and it is these 1%’ers of these jackasses that are the real problem.

    In 2020 the USA will be a much safer place for everyone…count on it!

  3. Kingdom Warrior

    Oh Delta One, you really crack me up, there is medication you can take for your delusions. The Democrats are a dead party, more and more are walking away from the party. They have no platform to stand on buy hate towards Republicans. It will be fun to watch them implode from within has they attack each other like a cancer. They are the party of anti-Patriotism, anti-God, anti-Israel, all the things that have made our nation great!

  4. Delta One

    Cracked up (or on crack) KW– I didn’t mention a democrat, however, I’d be OK with that. My family and friends have been democrats for a very long time and are extremely patriotic, 7 generations of Military men and women who support the constitution of the US and will defend it to the end of times. Some are church-goers, some are agnostic and some are nones. Regardless, America was NOT founded by christian patriots and the only revisionists that are trying to change that are Christian dominonists. As for other countries like Israel, it has the right to exist as a Jewish state and equal member of the global community.

    You might want to take some of your own medication first to help your condescending attitude.

  5. G

    KW, the Republicans have been anti-Patriotism when you look at how they sold out the American people time and time again when it comes to voter suppression, sending jobs overseas, not investing in America such as roads, schools, education, etc.

  6. Paula

    Dearest “Kingdom Warrior,”
    You appear to be attempting to hijack this conversation in order to air your rather manic screed regarding your twisted opinion of the Democratic party. Very immature and inappropriate, sweetie. Your only defense for your views is your arrogance, your hate, your disdain, and your fear. Gee–that really makes me want to jump on your wagon! Honestly, you come off as the Tasmanian Devil cartoon, and that’s not especially effective. I know, I know–you’re not interested in an adult dialogue. You would never participate in a conversation in which other views were expressed and found to be valid and supportable. You’re too feeble for that. You’d fold like a cheap card table.

  7. Stephen

    Delta One may claim that America was not founded by Christian patriots. However, the 1783 Treaty of Paris between Britain and the U.S. says otherwise. The preamble of the treaty contains the words “In the Name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity” This is obviously a reference to Christianity.

  8. Delta One

    Stephen — I can quote Treaties all day my friend…

    Treaty of Tripoli Article 11 stating that “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” It was signed in Tripoli on November 4, 1796, and at Algiers (for a third-party witness) on January 3, 1797. It was ratified by the United States Senate unanimously without debate on June 7, 1797, taking effect June 10, 1797, with the signature of the second U.S. President, John Adams.

    A second treaty, the Treaty of Peace and Amity signed on July 4, 1805, superseded the 1796 treaty. The 1805 treaty did not contain the phrase “NOT, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion!

    America’s Founders were guided by secular ideas and self, class, or state interests. These scholars do not deny that the Founders were religious, but they contend that they were mostly deists—i.e., persons who reject many Christian doctrines and who think God does not interfere in the affairs of men and nations.

  9. Mark Sebree

    Stephen,

    Something else to consider about that treaty. The US Constitution had not been written yet. We were operating under the Articles of Confederation. The US Constitution was written because the Articles of Confederation did not work in a peacetime government, giving the federal government little power to do much of anything. It was written rather hurriedly in order to provide a government to run the Revolutionary War, and as such, was not especially strong nor did it provide a durable government.

    The US Constitution superseded the Articles of Confederation, and provided a strong framework for our federal government, incorporating various checks and balances to its power, while maintaining a reasonable degree of sovereignty to the states.

    The Articles of Confederation lasted less than 10 years after the Revolutionary war ended, and less than 15 years total, before being scrapped. The US Constitution has lasted for over 225 years, and is still considered to be the supreme law in the USA. Therefore, it is quite clear that the US Constitution is the more important document, since it governs the way our country is currently run.

Leave a Reply

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

*