My Photo

« Marriage Protection Amendment | Main | What to Do About the Tom Pollard/ Nancy Vaughan Decision: The Way Forward »

August 31, 2011

Comments

Ah, but that was then; this is NOW!

Our living Constitution has evolved to the point that we see the grievous abuse of "our rights" that the above represents, don't we?

Thanks for this post. The commitment to victory played an important role in the outcome of WWII. We have not had the commitment since then, and no victory. And if the enemy had prevailed in WWII, is it likely that the Germans and Japanese would have then squared off to see which would rule the World? Hitler would never be satisfied with half a loaf.

Funny, I've yet to see or hear of anyone shooting at people as they stroll about the parking lot at Lawndale Baptist Church. Not one shot fired. Why are you so scared of the minority when people of your like-mind still control this nation? Is this some sort of a rallying cry, an effort to prepare the Christian Soldiers leading up to extermination of liberals, Catholics, ethnic, minorities, Jews, Muslims and anyone else who refuses to march in lock step with the believers? Or are you really that scared?

Keep carrying the water-- you'll need it to wash the blood from the believers' hands.

Billy, really...

"...people of your like-mind still control this nation..."

That is not even remotely true. And if there were a desire to exterminate the groups you mention, I suspect you might know about it by now.

Be assured, genuine Christians do not fear the circumstances such as those which we now face. Our hope is elsewhere. But we do insist on religious liberty.

Joe, you have all the religious liberty in the world.

Billy, in fact there are some very serious threats to religious liberty that are arising. Read the "Religious Liberty" section of the Manhattan Declaration to learn more:

http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/the-declaration/read.aspx

I wonder how any Jewish or Muslim sailors would have reacted? Just shut up and sing, like you mean it.

Of course, if the European Jews had just gotten with the pogrom earlier, and had shut up and sang, they would have been better off, right? Also note how long it took FDR's administration to allow them to be welcomed here. Even liberal lions get the occasional thorn in their paws.

Jim, I think we have to assume that the American Jewish population had many big supporters of FDR. And I doubt they were substantively harmed by this particular church service.

I think the height of Muslim immigration did not come until the 1960's and thereafter-- thanks in large part, I seem to recall, to immigration legislation pushed by Ted Kennedy. They would not have been substantively harmed by this service either. It is not described as primarily a denominational, sectarian service. It is, however, clearly monotheistic.

No one said "substantively harmed". but clearly not treated with equal respect for their religious beliefs, which preclude praying to Jesus. How does one tell an airman or sailor risking his life to disregard such disrespect? Why must Jesus be the one and only name prayed to in such an instance? Why not leave it at "God", period? I know, in this historical case, it was because such ecumenical/non-denominational prayers were not the custom. Why is it so anathema now to many who insist on singling out the name of Jesus above all?

Those who call upon the name of Jesus, if they take His deity seriously, oft tend to insist upon doing so. They tend to view it as a limitation upon their own religious freedom if they are not allowed to do so.

It is not clear that is what happened, however, during this particular religious service on the battleship involving FDR and Churchill. It is not clear that anyone was praying to Jesus or calling upon His name.

The comments to this entry are closed.