Another Brick in the Wall

Celina Durgan reports at NRO that the Secular Coalition of America is asking folks to knit bricks to show their outrage over the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision. The knitwits at the SCA want to send hundreds yarn bricks to the Court to express concern for the “wall of separation” between church and state being breached.

Uh, huh.

If the knitwits had ever read Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists (the source of the phrase), they would know that he intended it to mean that the government should keep its nose out of the business of religion and not the other way around. I doubt that Jefferson would approve of a law or regulation that mandates that one must violate his conscience.


34 thoughts on “Another Brick in the Wall

  1. These are the same folks offended by the cross in a military cemetery. The so-called tolerance of the left is non-existent, and the true meaning of liberal has been lost.

    • While I would still disagree with them thouroughly, I’d find that position a little less offensive to me if they would be equally offended by Islamic symbols. That they are only offended by Christian (and occasionally Jewish) symbols shows what their real concerns are, and “tolerance” isn’t one of them.

  2. My views on religion/government in the USA especially focuses on crosses and chaplains in the Military. We should respect the religious rights of our citizen soldiers and furnish worship and remembrance materials on government property at government expense.

    The crosses, stars of david etc REFLECT the faith of those who chose to serve all citizens – many at the expense of their lives.

    We have a duty to their memory to honor their beliefs that drove them to do for others at the expense of self and forever stand against those who cannot deal with the notions of duty honor and religion.

    Chaplains are there to comfort the loved ones who have passed on, Military Chaplains are there to honor and maintain the faith of those soldiers who in their own free will gave themselves to God and us.

    Only an animal of the lowest sort would let these symbols that are of free will, be stricken from the public view. What shadows they must cast upon their hearts – I pity their lonely existence and can only pray that they return to the family that we all are.

    Now we intrude into the private companies – companies who are owned by people who of free will have beliefs and faith that dare to intersect with government overreach and somehow we have existed for 250 years without needed government to dictate what kinds of coverage private companies must offer.

    Time to make a change, time to unite in the opposition against all of our freedoms against those who chose the one over the many

  3. One doesn’t have to belong to any religion to oppose abortion and agree with Hobby Lobby’s position. Hobby Lobby’s opposition to forms of birth control that destroy a fertilized ovum isn’t based on any biblical reference to abortion, because there is none. There is “Thou Shalt Not Kill,” and that about covers it. So the “separation of church and state” argument is a fraud, since opposition to murder is based on natural law that is recognized by most cultures throughout the world, Islamic ones excepted. What is it about leftists/liberals/Democrats that make them so wildly enthusiastic about abortion?

  4. This wasn’t a 1st Amendment decision. Employment Division v. Smith effectively destroyed religious protection against discriminatory laws. The liberals “won.”

    The Hobby Lobby challenge was based on a statute, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, that effectively repealed Employment Division v. Smith. If the liberals want to change the result, they would be better suited to petition Congress for redress.

    I thought they were supposed to be the educated ones?

    • That they are the better educated and more intelligent is their claim. Over the years I have seen very little evidence to back it up.

      It is indeed amazing how many people get offended when you point out that the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

      • They do have the ability to collect a vast array of credentials. They also seem to put way too much value in the credentials at the neglect of the process of acquiring same.

      • You mean like someone that throws a few bucks at an organization to become a “Professional Journalist” but then proceeds to violate almost ever tenant of what the credential actually stands for?

      • Too true. I know academics who measure success solely by the number of letters after their name. These same folks can’t work a TV remote or a microwave. They seem to work hard to prove the old saw about experts being folks who learn more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing.

  5. Speaking of Everyone’s Favorite Retired Part Time Investigative Journalist™, it looks like he’s hunting for hidden assets today, and doing his usual quality work…

  6. Perhaps they could save some time and just needle point the portion of the Constitution that says you can force others to finance your recreational activities.

    They object to these sorts of rulings because they suffer from a paucity of imagination. They think there will never be a world where they are not in the ascendency and thus they feel fine about using force to get what they want at other people’s expense. They can’t imagine the shoe ever being on the other foot. Needless to say, things will not end well for them, or for any of us while they hew to such illusions.

    • I’ve tried pointing this out to liberals of my acquaintance. They honestly can’t see it. (Or else can’t bring themselves to believe that the shoe might ever change feet.)

Leave a Reply