Listen to today’s broadcast.
1. Major Hassan’s trial starts today. Remember, he is the one who killed and wounded a number of soldiers at Ft. Hood in Texas four years ago. We will keep you informed if there is anything important that comes out of this trial.
2. Still waiting to see what the out come of the latest threat from AlQuaeda which has closed about nineteen US embassies in Muslims Countries. I have contact with national security and counter terrorism professionals and so far I have not heard anything from them about what is going on. Many of us are still in the dark on this. About all we know is there was some communication between the leader of Al Quaeda in Pakistan and the leader of one of their affiliates on the Arabian peninsula. Again, we will keep you informed as this develops.
3. The Petition for the President Obama to declare the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group has reached 180,513 signers. You can sign the petition here. Lets see if we can get this over 200,000.
Make Islam illegal – Can it be done? – Should it be done?
As far as I can tell, the phrase Color of Religion was coined by Patrick Henry. He proposed an exception to the freedom of religion clause of the bill of rights. It was similar to what was proposed for the Virginia constitution below.
Proposed draft for Virginia Article 15 and 16:
‘That no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to Justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles. That religion, or the duty we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, and not by force or violence; and, therefore, that all men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, unpunished and unrestrained by the magistrates, unless, under the color of religion, any man disturb the peace, the happiness, or the safety of society; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.”
Approved Virginia Article 16::
“16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our CREATOR, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity, towards each other.”
Approved Maryland Article 37:
“That as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, all persons are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore, no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate, on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under the color of religion,he shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent, or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain, any place of worship, or any ministry;nor shall any person, otherwise competent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his religious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therefore either in this world or in the world to come.“
You can read our previous post on this issue here.
Whether it was the wisdom of the founding fathers or the providence of God, this exception was not in the final Bill of Rights. Knowing the nature of politics I believe this would not have been a good thing. It basically said that if the religion had practices that were deemed dangerous to society they could be legislated against.
Lets look at the key part of the proposed exception again: “…unless, under the color of religion, any man disturb the peace, the happiness, or the safety of society” The vagueness of this is far to broad. Politicians and lawyers are too good at manipulating words to make them say something totally different from their original intent.
One example should suffice to make the point Speaking of Baptists a leading Protestant school said, “[Baptist’s] underlying presuppositions are devastating to civilization. They break down every sphere of society.” (The Failure of the American Baptist Culture, p. 152, Copyright 1982 by Geneva Divinity School)
Can you see what would happen to Baptists if this crowd ever got a hold on the power of government? Under the exception clause they would loose their religious freedom. Suppose someone who felt your religion was dangerous to society, how would it affect you?
How many laws are presently on the books that have had unintended consequences? We have a Constitution that has served us well for more than two hundred years (wen it has bee followed). Be careful before you try to change it.
131total visits,2visits today