Establishing Atheism?

The recent Federal courts decision by Judge Lawrence Karlton declaring the words "Under God" unconstitutional for "establishing a religion" both appauls me because of the reasoning behind the law and doesn't surprise me at all considering the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is the most liberal court in the "United" States of America. I'm dismayed because if the words referencing God were seriously unconstitutional, then all American currency that says "In God We Trust" are immoral by definition and ought to be destroyed and replaced. But this debate is NOT just about the two words "Under God" in our nations pledge. It is about a minute group of atheists who forsee, at a foundational level, contrary to classical and historical American thought on how religious freedom ought to be implemented on governmental grounds, educational system, and in civilian life. Can you imagine what would happen if this took place in a Muslim country?

Unfortunately, Michael Newdow, the atheist who led this case, and most other anti-American athiests decided to reside in a nation that, from it's beginning, grounded it's freedom and rights "endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights...". America is the land of the free, home of the brave, and "One nation under God." Isn't it odd how these people claim their Right to remove the words "Under God", under the “inalienable Rights” which according to our Constitution, are “endowed by our Creator”. The problem now is that we are no longer "One Nation", but rather a large piece of land marked by individualism, "love myself", and "I'll help you if and ONLY if it benefits ME" mentality.

Writer JB Williams best describes the trends our nation has adopted over the last 200 years. He writes:

"Simply stated, Tyranny breeds discontent, discontent breeds outrage, outrage breeds action, action brings freedom, freedom breeds opportunity, opportunity breeds success, success breeds content, content breeds laziness, and laziness allows tyranny back in once again. It only took a little over 200 years to complete the cycle."

Folks, activist atheists do not simply want a pledge with the words "Under God" omitted; they are after a country that denies the existence of a God. Why would they want such a nation? Being made in the image of the Creator, they know without Him they are unaccountable for their short-comings. Without their Maker all laws are of matters political power. All "rights" become temporary pleasures until the next consensus pole assures us a little while longer. Atheists are unaware that it is our Christian principles that stonewall even the Rights of the non-believers in this country, not the men and women they worship.

If Christians won’t protect our nations Christian heritage who will, the atheists? Church we, as lovers of the God-given rights "endowed by our Creator", need to remember the 200 years our forefathers shed their blood to protect that which makes our nation great, namely our freedom to believe in a higher power and the blessings we have received because of it. We will not win this war of ideas if there lacks a frontline to impact those who seek to deny us our freedoms and liberties. Prayer is effective, but not enough. God has gifted us and expects us to actively engage the marketplace of ideas. Will you join me in defending this great nations history that has been given to us from our Founder?


Cross-blogged at Apologia Christi

Comments

Anonymous said…
Why do away with "under God"?

Because there are people who don't believe in God (atheists, Buddhists). There are people who believe in many gods (Hindus, pagans). There are people who don't believe we're under God's control (deists, pantheists). There are people who don't have the same God in mind as Christians do (Muslims, Sikhs, Baha'is). And so on. The USA is their country too, not just Christians'. You Christians want "under God" kept in order to keep your status quo of the USA being "a Christian nation" and thus not having to accord non-Christians the same rights as you have.

"One nation, indivisible" was good enough. "Under God" was anti-commie stuff added in the 1950s, and now that the Cold War's over it's not needed anymore (not that it was then, but what the hey).

Popular posts from this blog

How Many Children in Bethlehem Did Herod Kill?

Where did Jesus say "It is better to give than receive?"

The Bogus Gandhi Quote

Discussing Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Exodus 22:18 - Are Followers of God to Kill Witches?

Revamping and New Articles at the CADRE Site

A Botched Abortion Shows the Lies of Pro-Choice Proponents

Jewish writings and a change in the Temple at the time of the Death of Jesus

Tillich, part 2: What does it mean to say "God is Being Itself?"

The Folded Napkin Legend