Secularism as State Religion

My greatest concern for this country involves our drift toward a state religion.

The average American doesn’t know what a state religion is or how it works, but most nations have a particular religious viewpoint that they advocate. For example, across Scandinavia the nations are officially Lutheran. When a person is born in those countries, they are automatically considered a member of that church, unless they petition not to be. A portion of their tax dollars go to support this church.

Even in communist countries which claim to have no religion, they support a state religion, specifically atheism. They do this by teaching it in the schools, promoting it in politics, and oppressing other viewpoints.

Now here in the United States we have a history in regard to state religion. The founders of our nation struggled to decide what religion America would endorse, but with the introduction of the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the US Constitution, we determined to have no state religion. At the time, it was an unprecedented decision. We opted for freedom of religion.

But today, just like communist countries actively promote atheism, our country has been actively promoting secularism. This may not be the most accurate word, so let me be very specific in defining the problem. The government has begun a policy of saying that you have freedom of thought, but not of action. You can believe whatever you want, but you cannot act on it when it violates the government agenda.

By acting on it, I am referring both to personal patterns of living and to the proclamation of your beliefs. Proclamation, preaching and teaching, is going to be a part of any religion, but now if you preach the wrong things, you can lose your status as a valid church in this country

If we are really going to be having a government which oversees the activities of churches, we probably should apologize to Russia and China. After all this is the practice these governments have had for generations and a primary reason we have spoken of them as not being free.

Advertisement

Coexist: Facts and Falsehoods

Recently I was on a mission trip to one of those trendy, touristy, new agey towns. As we prayer walked up and down their streets I saw a lot of Coexist bumper stickers. I agree with what the sticker says, but necessarily what people read into it or think it says.

What I mean by coexist is giving humanity room to decide for themselves what they will believe.

What I don’t mean by coexist is the accompanying assumption of many, namely that it doesn’t matter what you believe. It does matter what you believe. Jesus is the truth. But you cannot glorify God by physically forcing someone to accept this truth. Faith requires that they choose to accept it. Love for God, like any other love, only means something when it is freely given.

On the other side of the coin though, I do not believe that discussion, education, or witness is a form of coercion. People who are offended by hearing the religious views of others, need to grow up and toughen up. Words and ideas are never to be feared by people who are seeking the truth.

So coexistence is a matter of religious freedom. I believe God gave us religious freedom because it supported His purpose. He wants us to have the faith to choose to serve Him, or alternatively to choose the consequences of rejecting Him. Therefore being Christian naturally leads to a belief in religious freedom.

However, not every religious viewpoint supports religious freedom. The very first symbol in the normal Coexist bumper sticker does not believe in religious freedom, and in fact believes that forced conversions and religious war have a place in God’s will.

This is a major falsehood in what people think they are saying with those Coexist stickers. They think they are saying all religions are basically the same, that all are equally at fault in sowing disharmony, and that it is possible to maintain your beliefs and peacefully coexist. This is a deep pile of false ideas.

Wouldn’t you rather work from a foundation of truth, morality and genuine religious freedom?

 

Bathroom Wisdom

One of the political movements that I can’t make heads or tails of is the law to give legal protection to those who choose to use the restroom labeled for the other gender. All over America, cities have passed laws making it legitimate for a man to enter a woman’s restroom and for a woman to use a man’s restroom.

This law is advocated as a means of supporting the LGBT community, but it also seems likely to have the effect of allowing predators easy access to victims. Apparently preventing sexual violence is of less concern than the possibility that a LGBT individual would feel oppressed by having to use the restroom designed for people of their same physical gender.

This is the root issue behind recent events in Houston. The mayor subpoenaed the sermons from five local pastors. She felt they had crossed some kind of line by preaching against the law before it was passed in that city. The idea her office could take charge of what was presented in local pulpits was eventually rejected. I have mixed reports on whether she is still seeking to access the statements and print communications made by these church leaders, outside of worship. Apparently she is under the impression pastors have a different freedom of speech than the rest of the country? So it’s illegal or immoral to oppose a law that is not passed yet?

So safety has to take a back seat to the LGBT demands. Then the first amendment is given an LGBT exception. Apparently LGBT concerns now rule the world.

Maybe we better rethink these choices. First give us back our constitution. I promise you, no matter how politically correct you think you are, you are going to miss it when it is gone.

Next let’s return to common sense. It is more important to return to protecting society from physical danger than from social awkwardness.

Finally, for those who feel oppressed, get over it. Get tougher, learn not to be a slave of your feelings. Allow yourself to be inconvenienced for the safety of others, rather than expecting others to be placed in peril to preserve your convenience.