Sunday, February 5, 2012
This President and his political party have made it abundantly clear they are Secularists, and specifically anti-Christian. Here’s a few items to make the point.
I had written earlier that I’m disgusted by the use of Our Savior Jesus Christ being used as a political pawn. The anti-Christian bigot Obama did just that when he attended a prayer breakfast and used the time meant for communing with God to make a Marxist campaign speech, saying Jesus' admonition to help the poor means the government must raise taxes, especially on the rich.
Obama: “When I talk about shared responsibility, it’s because I genuinely believe that in a time when many folks are struggling and at a time when we have enormous deficits, it’s hard for me to ask seniors on a fixed income or young people with student loans or middle-class families who can barely pay the bills to shoulder the burden alone.” … “And I think to myself, if I’m willing to give something up as somebody who’s been extraordinarily blessed and give up some of the tax breaks that I enjoy, I actually think that’s going to make economic sense.”
“But for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’ teaching that, ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.’”
He added this even more appalling observation: “…mirrors the Islamic belief that those who’ve been blessed have an obligation to use those blessings to help others, or the Jewish doctrine of moderation and consideration for others.” Since Christianity came first, and Islam imperfectly picked and chose what it wanted and needed to oppress people, I don’t think so.
The quote, “Unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required,” does not mean from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs. Obama sees everything through Marxist lenses. It’s his religion.
Part of that religion is to ignore the establishment clause of the Constitution (and the rest of the Constitution too, but I need to stay on point), “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” and the free exercise clause, "... or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". The latest kerfuffle is his forcing the Catholic Church to adhere to his secular religion, which advocates the killing of babies, i.e., abortion, over the life of babies. Add to that forcing, against the teaching/values/beliefs of the Church requiring them to provide contraception. This Administration ruling forcing the church to provide abortions, sterilizations, and contraceptives as part of their health care programs is a requirement from Health and Human Services Department, not even legislation. They can get away with it because, contrary to what was said to the public by Obama and the Democrats, mandating abortion is in ObamaCare. This doesn’t only apply to the Catholic Church, but to all religious organizations; if the Catholic Church and other organizations stick to their guns on this, many religious funded hospitals, health facilities and companies will be forced to shut down. The Obama administration isn’t entirely insensitive to this issue; all the affiliated organizations have a year before being forced to comply or shut down.
Archbishop Timothy Nolan has published a letter to the president in protest, and there are several with some variations from many Bishops in
. A copy of one is at the bottom of this article. America
He's also forbidden Chaplin's in the military to comment on this abuse of power, this ignoring of the Constitution, this forcing of Religion, specifically Christianity, to ignore and reject the teachings of their respective churches. He is Commander in Chief and has the legal right to do so, but not the moral right.
Recently struck down by the Supreme Court, and not reported or under reported by the re-elect Obama press, was a ruling requiring Churches to adhere to equal opportunity legislation. This requires the Catholic Church to allow female priests, and Jews female rabbis. You may color me wrong on this, but aren’t elected officials sworn to uphold the Constitution? If I’m right, the Secularists in power that took that oath are definitely ignoring both the establishment clause and free exercise clause.
Off on a tangent here; the first female ex-Speaker of the House, a professed Catholic, stated about the issue: “First of all, I am going to stick with my fellow Catholics in supporting the administration on this. I think it was a very courageous decision that they made, and I support it.” Say what? She’s one of many Catholic politicians that are pro-abortion and contraception ignoring the teachings of the Church she professes to be a member of. For most of us practicing Christians, God comes first, and informs our beliefs and actions. If one is a politician, and speaks honestly about his\her Faith, they should let it be known and live by it. I think if a Catholic runs for office on a pro-abortion platform, or lives and legislates in opposition to the Church, they should renounce the Church. If not, and I’m not Catholic, so I don’t know how exactly this works, but if they stay in the Church and support the kinds of regulation written about here, they should be excommunicated. It shouldn’t bother these anti-Christian, anti-Catholic Catholics anyway since they apparently don’t believe or practice Church doctrine.
There’s a whole section of the Bible discussing Spiritual Warfare, mostly in Ephesians 6: 10- 18. This is where it manifests itself in physical world. We have the leader of the free world leading an assault on Christianity (and supporting Islam). Good for the Catholic Church for standing up to these bigots and secularists.