This Symbol Of Christmas Is Under Assault, But Here’s Why America’s Freedom Depends On It

Photo credit: shutterstock.com

Tis the season for the heartwarming Christmas letters from the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).  You know the routine.  Each holiday season, these groups send letters to municipalities threatening lawsuits if the recipient municipality will not remove a nativity display from a particular public property.

Last Christmas, I wrote an article explaining why it is frivolous to remove nativity displays from government property.  In that article, I observed that a nativity display is the antithesis of an apotheosis display.

To recap that article, a nativity display celebrates the moment in time God becomes a man, while an apotheosis display celebrates the moment in time man becomes a god.

I then pointed to the “Apotheosis of Washington” painted on the domed ceiling of the U.S. Capitol rotunda by Constantino Brumidi.  Ironically, Brumidi was commissioned by the government to paint the Apotheosis for $40,000.  Next, I asked the rhetorical question, “Why is it unconstitutional to have a nativity display on public property, but not a government-commissioned apotheosis display?”

Now I want to explain why it matters that cities and towns across America remain allowed to display nativity scenes on public property at Christmas.

When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, he explained that our freedoms come from God.  “All men are created equal,” he says, and “they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  Jefferson also clearly stated that the purpose of civil government was “to secure these rights.”

A nativity display on government property reminds us that all humans have unalienable rights- rights that cannot legitimately be taken away- because these rights come from God.  A nativity display celebrates the source of our rights and reminds our government officials that it is their duty to help secure these rights.

Similarly, a nativity scene on government property reminds us that we are a republic, not a democracy. Our republic acknowledges God as the source of our unchangeable rights. A democracy is vastly different. The rights granted in a democracy are determined not by God, but by the ever-changing opinions of the majority of mankind.

Ultimately, the present battle waged by the FFRF and ACLU is a battle over who gets to be God. Who will be acknowledged as the source of our rights?  Will it be God, or will it be man?

Given the nation’s present woes and injustices, it is altogether fitting that nativity displays remain in the public arena as a guiding light and reminder to all of the source of our freedoms.

 

Learn more about your Constitution with Doug Carter and the “Institute on the Constitution” and receive your free gift.

 

About the author:

Doug Carter is currently an instructor of Ethics, Old Testament, New Testament, and World Religions in N. C.

Photo credit: shutterstock.com

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

What Holder And Obama Are Doing To This Border Agent Exposes Their Backward Thinking

Murrieta Border Patrol Station

Nearly two years ago, a Mexican teen was shot to death by a U.S. Border Patrol agent near the fence that separates the United States from Mexico. A few weeks ago, the ACLU, acting on behalf of the mother of 16 year-old Jose Antonio Elena Rodriguez, filed suit against Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

The lawsuit claims the boy was innocently playing basketball just before he was shot in the back. The Border Patrol claims the teen was throwing rocks across the border, endangering the agent’s life.

Now, it’s learned that Attorney General Eric Holder has ordered DOJ’s Civil Rights Division to investigate this shooting, as well as at least one other, by CBP agents in Arizona.

According to a post on the typically left-leaning buzzfeed.com:

CBP, and in particular the Tucson Sector in Arizona, use of force against undocumented immigrants and Mexican citizens inside their home country has come under increasing scrutiny over the last year, and the investigations come on the heels of a federal civil lawsuit filed by the family of a 16-year-old Nogales, Mexico, boy who was killed during a cross-border shooting by CBP.

The involvement of Justice Department headquarters could represent a significant shift in how the Obama administration is addressing violence along the border. FBI investigators almost never bring criminal charges against CBP agents and officers, and human rights organizations have accused the administration of turning a blind eye towards the border.

News of this stepped-up probe by Holder’s Justice Department comes shortly after an earlier report of a leaked intelligence analysis by CBP that brought to light serious border-security issues — problems many argue are created, or made worse by, Obama administration policies of lax border enforcement.

Here are highlights of the critical CBP analysis via breitbart.com:

Among the significant revelations are that individuals from nations currently suffering from the world’s largest Ebola outbreak have been caught attempting to sneak across the porous U.S. border….

As of July 20, 2014, 1,443 individuals from China were caught sneaking across the porous U.S. border this year alone….

Twenty-eight individuals from Pakistan were caught attempting to sneak into the U.S. this year alone….

Thirteen Egyptians were caught trying to sneak into the U.S. this year alone….

Four individuals from Yemen were caught attempting to sneak into the U.S. by Border Patrol agents in 2014 alone….

So, here we have an Eric Holder civil rights investigation underway into actions of besieged Border Patrol agents whose job is made all the more difficult and dangerous because of actions/inactions of Holder’s boss, Barack Obama.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

The 4th Of July Celebrates Freedom And This Sheriff Won’t Allow His To Be Crushed By The ACLU

Photo credit: Facebook/Julian Whittington Campaign

When Louisiana lawman Julian Whittington announced plans for a Fourth of July prayer rally, many locals expressed a desire to attend the faith-based patriotic event. Activists from the American Civil Liberties Union, however, wanted to shut it down, alleging such a gathering is unconstitutional.

The Bossier Parish sheriff said this week that he has no intention of giving into the demands, noting that his constituency is overwhelmingly supportive of the principles embraced by the ‘In God We Trust’ rally.

“Not only am I elected to serve the people of Bossier Parish,” he told the Shreveport Times; “but I live here and my family lives here. I think Bossier Parish is a better place with Christianity and Christian values involved in it.”

His loyalty, he maintained, is to the people he serves and his community – not Washington, D.C. bureaucrats.

“What they, what they say,” he asserted, “I couldn’t really care less.”

Nonetheless, the ACLU is determined to make its opinion known.

“If the event is held on sheriff’s property,” the Louisiana chapter’s executive director stated, “then by definition it is a public event that sends a message of government endorsement of Christianity.”

Whittington has plenty of local support for the event, though, including one high-profile Republican who attended last year’s inaugural rally: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.

Don Gasper, like many locals, is enthusiastic about the rally and Whittington’s efforts overall.

“I’m behind him,” he said. “Too many of our Christian values are being thrown aside for this politically correct environment.”

The sheriff asserted that it is not the intention of organizers to proselytize, insisting that the event is only offered as a way to give interested locals an opportunity to embrace America’s founding principles.

“We’re not trying to push or convert,” Whittington said. “We’re not trying to round them up and force them into anything. There are no consequences if you don’t; that’s not it at all.”

He concluded the “idea that a small meeting in Bossier City somehow needs federal approval is ridiculous.”

Photo Credit: Facebook/Julian Whittington Campaign

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Teachers Union Contract Blatantly Discriminates Against Christians

It is common knowledge among millions of Americans that the current driving force behind public education has increasingly led the charge to indoctrinate the next generation with leftist ideology. Teachers unions have amassed considerable control over the school system, using their sway to shape the direction of an institution children are required by law to attend.

One of the latest outrageous reports emanating from this bastion of leftism, however, indicates just how dedicated unions are to the cause of whitewashing America’s founding principles and values.

One Michigan school district’s teachers union boasts a contract that unequivocally states that “[s]pecial consideration shall be given to … those of the non-Christian faith” in filling open positions within the school system. It appears that this inclusion not only violates a previous passage in the contract but also a state law that prohibits religious discrimination in employment decisions.

The contact, which governs teachers in the community until 2017, guarantees similar advantages for minorities and women. Though millions of Americans consider such considerations antithetical to the selection of the best candidate, regardless of race or gender, the emphasis on hiring non-Christians is especially distasteful.

Ann Arbor’s Thomas Law Center President Richard Thompson expressed his concern regarding the contract’s language.

“Why would they be discriminating against Christians?” he asked. “They are not supposed to be discriminating against people for their religious beliefs. It’s outrageous – and I believe it’s unconstitutional.”

He concluded that the document could clearly result in a religious litmus test for current and future teachers in the district.

“Are people going to hide their faith so they can get a promotion?” he wondered. “There is a subtle persecution of Christians.”

While Thompson’s organization generally champions traditional causes, even the overwhelmingly leftist American Civil Liberties Union found fault with the contract.

Rana Elmir of the state’s ACLU chapter indicated that “public schools themselves should not be in the business of promoting particular religious beliefs or religious activities over others and they should protect children from being coerced to accept religious or anti-religious beliefs.”

The fact that Christianity is specifically denigrated in the contract offers a stark insight into the level of disdain today’s left has toward the morals and values found in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Though this particular passage is outrageous on its own, research has shown that Michigan’s teachers unions as a whole have a long history of including contract stipulations in violation of the law. Six in 10 of these contracts reportedly contain such passages.

–B. Christopher Agee

Have an idea for a story? Email us at tips@westernjournalism.com

Photo Credit: Lovemykia (Creative Commons)

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Maryland Cop To Citizen: “You Have No Rights”

As smartphones with built-in camcorders become more ubiquitous, citizens who witness arrests and other police activities increasingly use the technology to capture such moments on tape.

For fans of law enforcement transparency, such added accountability is a positive trend. Many officers, however, express a different point of view.

When police in Towson, Md. initiated the arrest of two suspects this week, a local CBS affiliate reported a bystander reached for his phone and immediately began capturing footage of the unfolding event. A short time later, one officer approached the amateur videographer, who expressed his belief that he had a right to record the interaction.

“Get out of my face,” the officer snapped, despite the fact that the unidentified man was positioned a considerable distance away from the action. This prompted the civilian to once again verbally uphold his right.

“You have no rights,” the cop shot back. After momentarily leaving – and after another officer approached the same individual – the first officer returned, unleashing a profane tirade.

“Do you see the police presence here?” the officer asked. “Do you see us all? We’re not f***ing around.”

He warned the man to “shut your f***ing mouth or you’re going to jail,” at which point the officer again momentarily retreated. In a matter of moments, however, he returned and appeared to physically push the citizen.

“I thought I had freedom of speech here,” he told the officer.

“You don’t,” the cop barked back. “You just lost it.”

An example of the rare instances in which those on the left and right can find some common ground, a local American Civil Liberties Union spokesperson expressed the common assertion that this officer acted in an extremely inappropriate manner.

David Rocah called his behavior “highly problematic,” noting that the “fact that officers an act this way, knowing that they’re being filmed, I think shows a level of impunity that is quite troubling.”

Baltimore County police spokesperson Elise Armacost confirmed the department is “concerned about what we saw in the video” and “will be taking a thorough look at that video.”

Reports of such apparent overreaction, however, are surfacing in communities across the nation with alarming regularity. Obviously, just a small fraction of these are actually captured on video.

Activist police officers, it seems, are following the federal government’s lead by asserting power over citizens for which they have no lawful claim. Further suppressing the individual’s integral freedoms of speech and expression only strip the only recourse Americans have against such blatant abuses.

Click here to watch the entire video below. Warning: Video contains explicit language.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom