It’s Time to Start Calling Evangelicals What They Are: The American Taliban
JC Weatherby
914196

This is hilariously ignorant. First of all, the Constitution acknowledged the de facto separation of Church & State by its very construct laid out in the Constitution. It clearly spells out the political process, and any Church is clearly omitted. There could be no Church-State (without a violent revolution) even if Christians wanted it.
Secondly, the separation of Church & State was a necessary construct in order to get the various States to agree to the federal alliance, since most of the States already HAD a State-Church. But they weren’t ALL the SAME State-Church, so if the States thought the federal govt. might end up favoring ONE of those State-Churches, then the States would have been a no-go with the federal government! So, the Constitution never prohibited the STATES from having State-Churches, and whether they were right or wrong, the federal government eventually bullied the States into eliminating their State-Churches.
Thirdly, the author fails to recognize (in spite of her claiming to have “been there”) that virtually all Christians know that you cannot MAKE anyone become a Christian, so legislating that everyone believe what we believe is so absurdly hysterical that it makes one question the veracity of the author’s claim.
Fourthly, claiming that our motivation in preventing babies from being m*rd*red is that we want to “restrict women’s rights” is so incredibly ignorant as to lead to the conclusion that she is misleadingly disingenuous. No, we sincerely DO BELIEVE that that little “blob of tissue” with arms, legs,, brain, and that pretty little face is actually a real human being. If you ever take a look at a premature baby, you’ll know they’re not “terminating a blob of tissue”.
Never before in our history, have Christians been prosecuted for refusing to support a clearly ungodly event (i.e. homosexual marriage). Christian businesses (even the ones targeting by homosexuals for prosecution) proved that they did NOT refuse to serve homosexuals, and did so on a regular basis. But to require them, under penalty of law, to support an EVENT that we know is sinful, is like requiring that an atheist, under penalty of law, support a local church event.
So, this is a time when Christian teachers are being fired for participating in public Christian events where they pray and speak, Christian soldiers are being physically prevented from speaking of Christ in a PRIVATE retirement ceremony, Christian businesses are receiving death threats for saying they wouldn’t cater a homosexual wedding, Christian children are being told they cannot speak of Christ in the classroom (unless they’re using His name as a cuss word), and many other examples that make it clear that the first amendment more & more does NOT mean Freedom of Religion for Christians in the United States.
 — A Former Atheist

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Bill Charlton’s story.