The New York Post covers MRFF’s victory in getting gigantic Jesus painting covered at USMMA: “US Merchant Marine Academy covers Jesus painting over religious complaint”
From the article:
Eighteen people, including five Jews, asked the Military Religious Freedom Foundation to appeal on their behalf to the Kings Point academy, which reports to the US Department of Transportation, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported.
Recent Posts
- December 6, 2023 | No comments
- December 5, 2023 | 2 comments
- December 5, 2023 | No comments
- December 2, 2023 | 1 comment
This is a TOTAL JOKE. The so-called “victories” of the Khazarian Name Stealer seed of the serpent, will be oh so short-lived. They will come back to bite their ass and rip it to shreds – before this decade passes. The synagogue of satan and it’s UN-holy serpent will have their heads crushed, then a Lake of Fire will consume them. But first, God’s wrath is coming for you – this pertains to YOUR foul stench – “they shall seek death, but death shall flee from them.” Elongated skull pukes. Our Father is coming with His wrath, with His Elect One – “see how the Elect One judgeth Azazel and His host.” Your watcher fathers will piss their pants like little girls, consumed with fear beyond any you ever imagined – when the Holy Great One appears from His camp – just before the Abyss swallows them. You shall join them. Your evil upon your own heads seven thousand times seven thousand. YES!! Be destroyed and made an utter end of – Khazar scum.
Ya know, I understand that spiffy speech is supposed to strike dread into my heart but, honestly, it’s all been said before. And the only smiting ever done was by humans professing their twisted idea of love as they killed, SA’d, maimed their way across the countryside.
Time for something new I believe. Let’s try Democracy where we each leave our violent and barbaric ways at the door and try living in respect of our fellow citizens.
We’ve done the religious extremists route more than once. Really, it’s time for something new.
Hey Mikey…great name for one approaching 70 btw…You seem to delete all posts that do not conform to your narrative…that’s how to show em…strong guy.
Just saw your photo….ha….I get the picture now. One very unhappy sob.
Myself…76 grad…licensed ship master living offshore since the 80s…from Marbella Spain where I delivered a yacht in 80 to CentAm since 89. Retired at 47 in 01. After nearly 2 decades in CR, moved south…
As mentioned in one of my deleted posts…I love jews…in fact the vast majority of my prayers are to a couple of my favorite jews.
I now also pray for you as well, Mikey.
You take care now.
PS
Matthew 5 39
Karen claims to ‘love’ Jews but neglects to show respect by capitalizing the word Jew (by the way the rest of their comments were found on another post so, not deleted).
And then, their Post Script prayer is this, Matthew 5 39:
“But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also”. It’s part of the eye for an eye parable, taken completely out of context but Karen is ‘Christian’ so it’s all good?
I don’t know about the rest of y’all but when someone tells me they “love” me by labeling me as evil first… well, let’s just say I don’t need that kind of love. Actually, no one does, ya know what I mean?
Two weeks have passed since the USMMA Superintendent ordered the mural to be curtained except upon special request at a non-mandatory meeting. I understand midshipmen are now circulating a petition asking for the curtain to be taken down. These midshipmen are woefully ignorant of their duty as reservists and future officers. I think the Merchant Marine Academy needs a stand-down day, where midshipmen review their Naval Reserve oath from plebe year and the oath they must take before being commissioned as reserve and active duty officers. These oaths say they swear to “support and defend the Constitution.” Discussion should occur of the (No) Establishment Clause of the First Amendment; the civil service’s and military’s strict regulations requiring no bias towards religions; examples of inappropriate religious displays that commanding officers ordered to be taken down; and how supporting these laws makes one a //more effective// leader at home and abroad.
Because taxpayers subsidize the Academy, any midshipman, officer or civil servant refusing to acknowledge that Christian symbols are permitted only in certain, highly limited areas of a federal government or military facility should be shown the door.
In God we trust
Mac, only if all you care about is money. Thank you for revealing yourself.
Alian Chubb, I am a 74′ graduate of KP and took those oaths while that painting was in place, since 1947! In fact, every student since 1947, when the painting was put in its present place, has taken those same oaths without that painting having any negative impact on our ability to perform the duties to which we pledged our support of the Constitution.
Your argument is without validity! Taking the oath has nothing to do with having a painting of a leader posted in a prominent place. I refer to your suggestion that the Establishment Clause has validity and say that it is indeed without validity. Just because you say it does has no meaning just as MRFF’s statement that having the painting in place is unconstitutional, but has not submitted any support of the reason for such. Constitutionality is not up to MRFF, but up to the courts of the land. Maybe the Superintendent, who was admittedly put in a difficult position by what appears to be bullying threats, could have pushed back with some of the following.
Will MRFF go after the Federal Government itself for the following: In the Capitol Building is the painting Discovery of the Mississippi by DeSoto. Next to DeSoto is a monk who prays as a crucifix is placed in the ground. Additionally, there is the painting Baptism of Pocahontas. Throughout the Capitol Building, there are references to God and faith. From the base of the Washington Monument to its aluminum capstone are numerous references to God. This is fitting since George Washington was a religious man. When he took the oath of office on April 30, 1789, he asked that the Bible be opened to Deuteronomy 28. After the oath, Washington added, “So help me God and bent forward and kissed the Bible before him”.Source: https://probe.org/god-in-our-nations-capital/
The crucifix and baptism are uniquely Christian symbols of faith as is the complete Bible which includes the Christian New Testament as well as the Old Testament. Therefore, there must be literally thousands of symbols of Christianity in hundreds of federal buildings throughout the US. MRFF’s work has only just begun and I suspect some of the other targets will not succumb so easly to your tactics including the US Congress. The organization will never be successful in eradicating Christian the Christian faith from believers’ hearts no matter how many symbols you succesffuly remove from public buildings!
MRFF intentionally selected a vulnerable situation by choosing to represent 18 staff, students and faculty at USMMA. I suspect that Vice Adm Joanna Nunan, having been newly appointed to her role as Superintendent, did not want to cause a situation by pushing back. It is offensive that anyone would suggest that to the current student petition group would be incapable of defending the Constitution because they desire to defend their rights as citizens and future defenders of that Constitution by having a petition! It is indefensible to chastise and threaten those who desire to keep in place that which has always been in place!
K Jackson, Class ’74 USMMA
K Jackson dismissed the intent and words of the founders, specifically Thomas Jefferson.
They lied when they took their oath back in the day which, to me, calls into question every decision they’ve made since.
K reveals their immersion within the Christian bubble with their denial of anyone harmed by blatant Christian propaganda hung in a place of honor in a school funded by taxpayers. Exactly how would they know? Did they ask or did they assume everyone believed (or should believe) as they do?
Those of us who’ve had to tolerate the K Jackson’s in our life know the answer to my question.
First Liberty Institute is the law firm that won a 7-2 victory at the United States Supreme Court in 2023 in a case concerning the Bladensburg World War I “Peace Cross” in the case of American Legion et. al. v. American Humanist Association. The high court ruled that the monument, which has stood on public land in Maryland for approximately 50 years, does not violate the Establishment Clause of the US. Constitution.https://www.christianpost.com/news/navy-chaplain-accused-of-violating-constitution-for-encouraging-soldiers-to-lead-like-jesus.html
How is this case any different? Painting on public property for more than 75 years.
First Liberty Institute is the law firm that won a 7-2 victory at the United States Supreme Court in 2023 in a case concerning the Bladensburg World War I “Peace Cross” in the case of American Legion et. al. v. American Humanist Association. The high court ruled that the monument, which has stood on public land in Maryland for approximately 50 years, does not violate the Establishment Clause of the US. Constitution.https://www.christianpost.com/news/navy-chaplain-accused-of-violating-constitution-for-encouraging-soldiers-to-lead-like-jesus.html
How is this case any different? Painting on public property for more than 75 years.
Sorry, I accidentally posted the previous twice. Grey One Talks Sass (GOTS) on Jan 25 used a different interpretation of the passage quoted. The New King James Version of Matt 5:39 states “Jesus commanded His disciples, “Do not resist an evil person.” This command is a part of the Sermon on the Mount that Jesus preached in Matthew chpts 5—7.
GOTS version stated – “But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also”. GOTS, I believe Karen Mata would have to weigh in on this to clarify her intent, rather us making assumptions about her intent for using that Scripture. Wouldnt you agree?
Dear Mr. Jackson,
You write that, “Taking the oath [to become a midshipman, USNR or military officer] has nothing to do with having a painting of a leader posted in a prominent place.” Have you considered that for many people, Jesus is not a leader they care to celebrate? Do you understand that many people do not see Jesus as a messiah? To add injury to insult (sic), at times through history Jesus images have been wielded to coerce buy-in from non-Christians; to proselytize; to convert; sometimes to terrorize; and to tell people that their own personal belief system is not acceptable.
What is wrong with instead having a neutral workplace, where no religion nor religious practice is favored? The only reason I can see for a person rejecting a religious-neutral workplace is if the person does in fact want to force their belief system (their religion) on others. I will not be a part of this.
I expect you and I agree that what is “Constitutional” is what the courts say tomorrow. I imagine the Department of Transportation, MARAD, USMMA and MRFF take the same position. But this is today. For today, DoT, MARAD, USMMA and MRFF appear to agree that the Jesus mural violates the (No) Establishment Clause at least under certain conditions. I am betting that many also agree that the enormous, somewhat bigger than life Jesus image presents an environment indicating hostility to those who do not believe in Jesus as a savior. On my tax dollar, this is not acceptable.
Ailan Chubb
USMMA, Class of 1983
Ailan, you failed to address my previous posting in which SCOTUS found in favor forr a very similar situation to the painting at KP? I fail to see how the display of images whether Christian, Jewish, Islamic or otherwise constitutes foisting a religion upon one? No one is advocating for a religion supported by the state, least of all me! Separation of church and state means exactly what George Washington advocated for in: The Writings of George Washington: pt v., Speeches and messages to Congress, proclamations and addresses p 155 “I beg you 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.”
To my understanding GW was opposed to state religion while assuring that religions (to include Christianity) should not be persecuted against. So, the rights of Christians could well be “persecuted” against by the removal or covering of an otherwise non-religious painting. What about the painting is found to have religious meaning?
The irony is that by MRFF’s action they are, in fact, lending credence to the concern that this painting depicts Jesus as something more than a man!
Dear Mr. Jackson,
Pardon? The 2019 Bladensburg Peace Cross SCOTUS decision does not involve a military community. Do you understand that the law distinguishes between civilian First Amendment rights and military First Amendment rights? As a matter of law: Military communities, including midshipmen and officers, do not have the legal right to express religious beliefs to the same extent that their counterparts in the civilian world do. Why? The Supreme Court in 1974 stated that, “the different character of the military community and of the military mission requires a different application of [First Amendment] 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 that is protected in the civil population may nonetheless undermine the effectiveness of response to command. If it does, it is constitutionally unprotected.” See Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S.733 (1974).
Parker remains the law of the land today.
Second, even if the Jesus mural were not hanging in a military setting, Bladensburg is distinguishable because the situation (an enormous Peace Cross erected 98 years ago, sitting in the median of a highway, now on Maryland-owned land) does // not // require anyone to sit, stand or otherwise be in the Peace Cross’s presence. At the USMMA in the Elliot See room, midshipmen, faculty, staff and visitors typically have // no constructive choice // but to sit, stand or otherwise be present with a bigger than life Jesus image.
I believe the violation of the (No) Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is blatant.
Ailan Chubb
USMMA, Class of 1983
Part of the supreme court’s decision about the Bladensburg cross (in addition to its historic significance) involved its location in the middle of a state highway.
It would be impractical to turn over ownership and maintenance of the cross to a non-government organization becuse of safety and liability risks.
Similarly, it would be impractical to move this large painting on a wall to the chapel, where it should have been placed when it was first painted.
Ha! K Jackson, I going to bet you never played the game One of These Things Is Not Like the Others. But I’m also going to bet that K Jackson knew the Military and Civilian worlds have separate rules and hoped us deluded heathens did not.
To those who provided so many facts and insight, thank you. I’m honored to stand beside honorable warriors in protecting the Constitution.
Nationalist Christians (misguided Christians who believe they should be in charge of the USA government) will not win, our democracy will prevail because good people did something instead of nothing.
History tells me if Nationalist Christians win control of the USA govt the first thing to happen will be the purity tests (see Emo Phillips greatestGod joke for details) followed by a lot of death and suffering plunging civilization back into another dark age.
Not on my watch! And apparently not on a lot of folks too.
No facts today. I’m a ball of emotion and opinion.
Tom O, have you not seen the history of the mural at https://www.usmma.edu/about/communications/statement-painting-entitled-christ-water-united-states-merchant-marine-academy? In 1947 the Jesus mural was moved to the location in Wiley Hall that then served as the Academy’s chapel. It makes sense to return the Jesus mural to what is the Academy’s chapel today. Find the space. Now you know the drill: “Deeds not words. Can-do; yes ma’am, yessir.” If the mural could be moved into Wiley Hall, then it can be moved out. Give me ten midshipmen, ladders, a few basic tools,the MMA museum curator, a military or USMS officer to ensure quality control and safety, and a dozen Delano Hall box lunches. It’s done.
Until I read that history just now, everything I had previously read here led me to believe that it was painted on the wall itself, so couldn’t be easily moved.
At 1/30/2023 at 1:05 pm K.Jackson wrote “In the Capitol Building is the painting Discovery of the Mississippi by DeSoto. Next to DeSoto is a monk who prays as a crucifix is placed in the ground. Additionally, there is the painting Baptism of Pocahontas.”
Those are intended to be depictions of actual historic events, which happened to involve religion, as so many historical events do. The ability to distinguish between similarities is a basic measure of intelligence. Attempting to equate similar, but different, things is a basic propagandist’s technique.
At 1/31/2023 at 12:36 pm K.Jackson wrote “Christians could well be ‘persecuted’ against by the removal or covering of an otherwise non-religious painting. What about the painting is found to have religious meaning?”
If the painting has no religious meaning, then how would its removal be “persecuting” Christians? More illogical self-contradicting bullhit from the theocrats.