Liberal Hypocrisy on Church and State

Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State is at it again. This time, he’s ostracizing Justice Sam Alito for writing a letter to those who supported him and thanking them "for their prayers for him."

I want to thank Mr. Lynn for finally tipping his hand. Obviously, he has a revulsion for any speech regarding religion, even that written privately. He can not abide any public official (state) from using standard terms, commonplace parlance that expresses or acknowledges the human sentiment of something beyond the secular.

At the heart of this whole "separation" issue is a desire by the separationists that nothing be done or said by any individual holding any type of public office, anywhere, which implies that religion is part of our life. They want a "religion-rein" America.

Mr. Lynn, however, has no problem with a Catholic cardinal entering political (state) issues by calling for disobedience to any government law that would put limits on immigration or treat illegals different than regular U.S. citizens.

"Separation of church and state" is being used by liberals selectively: no good if acknowledging traditional religious practices but just fine if liberal causes are at stake. Similar to how the separationists never howl when for decades black churches were used — and still are — to promote liberal candidates and liberal social causes, and redistribution of wealth. No problem when Shrillary Clinton speaks at a Long Island synagogue — at services no less, delivering the "Sermon."

Mr. Lynn calls himself reverend. No problem. But don’t be fooled. There are many liberal ministers and rabbis whose allegiance is to liberalism first and foremost. In fact, they entered the religion business precisely as a means to promote liberal causes. Left-wing liberalism is what animates and energizes them, with the Good Book simply a device to advance their liberal message. Those parts of the Bible, the black-on-white scriptural passages, limiting man’s sexual and other appetites, hold no interest for them, in fact, turn them off. They reject "that stuff," the Bible’s conservative behavioral messages.

So yes, you can be a "clergyman" and use "separation of church and state" or whatever slogan works to extinguish beliefs considered conservative — be it nationalism, traditionalism, scriptural passages not politically correct, or reliance on the divine as opposed to the state.

The brunt of the attacks by the left against religion is against Christianity. Jewish symbols are basically left alone since serious practice of Judaism’s laws in America is quite small. American Jews constitute about 2% of the population and of that percentage less than 20% observe the biblical laws and follow its conservative philosophy. Its major organizations are socially and politically liberal. No threat, therefore, here to liberalism from the Jewish religion.

The separationists and cultural marxists never invoke separation of church and state when it comes to public Islamic symbols and prayer calls or public school Koranic student role playing and readings. They defend these things as being merely "cultural," not religious. Ask a Muslim, though, if he thinks his rituals are not religion, simply culture.

In their attempt to extinguish the Judeo-Christian ethic, the separationists, and the ACLUniks, countenance public Moslem expressions and extend special exemptions for Moslem behavior and wishes as a way to dilute our culture of its historic Christian overlay. For the moment, they will elevate Islam as a way to diminish Christianity’s importance.

Their gripe with serious Christianity is that they know that only it has the numbers, organizations, and belief to keep alive the politically conservative movement. The use today of the slogan separation of church and state is more about stopping political conservatism than it is about Santa Claus. It is more about narrowing venues in which conservative views can be expressed. It is an attempt to stifle conservatism and limit its ability to reach people. It is about abortion, and gay "marriage."

Lynn is terribly upset that the letter from Justice Alito was sent to James Dobson, noted leader of Focus on the Family, and a serious, conservative Christian. For Lynn and other separationists, involvement between an officer in the government and a religious leader is, basically, a constitutional violation. Unless, of course, it is Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson or Rev. Barry Lynn. They want all religious conservatives out of politics. In other words: "Stay in your churches and leave the debates involving government policy to the liberal clergy only."

What has been happening in America for the last 40 years is that those against historic American views who demand a "seat at the table" end up dictated who can sit at the table. Only their collaborators are viewed as legitimate while the rest of us are shoved out. This is the case be it regarding civil rights, education, law — and religion. In the end, they, not us, decide what are the rules of the game. In other words, they become The Table. And thus political correctness reigns.

I guess we law-abiding Americans now have a new task. We must begin finding all those letters written by Washington and Adams, Franklin and Jefferson, Lincoln and Reagan, where they mentioned the name God, or prayer, or church. We can’t have those letters part of our civic life. Someone might think our Founders and later Presidents broke the law and defied the Constitution. May the Higher Force or whatever Bless America.