Seperation of Church and State?

I see.

So.

Here we have a clear admission that when it comes to Jews, lest even law abiding, decent and regular citizens, be it in London or Sydney, object to something Jews want to do in non Jewish lands and the hosts are 'dishonest'.

All over.

Anytime non Jews object to this in non Jewish lands, it is everyone else that is being dishonest and a bigot.

This is starting to sound familiar. Bit like how Jews have always blamed the Romans, the Christians, the Arabs, the Muslims, etc, etc, etc..

Everyone else is wrong.

Everyone else is a bigot.

Except Jews.

Who are always the victims.

 

While (for reasons best know to others), some seems to want to 'drone about drones' on a thread not about drones, let us turn our attention to a fourth example.


Remember, we first have the one in the OP. Let us remind ourselves that the Gov are favouring one 'religous' group over every other, and for no reasons that can be determined to be valid. Excuses and vague soundbites? Sure. Hard and fast reasons with lots of supporting data? No. There is simply no evidence as to why the state should favour one religous minority in this financial matter.

Then we had the example of 'education day', which was enshrined into US law(see post 51), and is clearly a Jewish mandated concept, about the 'Jewish faith. We can clearly see this by post 51, and who pushed for it. There can be no doubt or question as to the origins and nature of it.

Again, this is quite at odds with the almost entire eradication of all Christian culture and education, including prayers (and often nativity plays), inside the same state schools.

Seems like no one was interested in enshrining their faith into law, by way of 'education day'.

Why pass a law for it anyway..?

We've had hard working, tax paying, native residents of Britain being slandered right here in their own land, and for why? Legitimate objections to Jews trying to change the nature of our land, with their obsession with creating ghetto's.

You can see how this same haughty impositon(then attacks) must have started on the people of Palestine.
First they push into a land in which they are not a majority. They are made welcomed by people with altrusim in their heart. And how do they repay the host? Well, there is no question that again and again, the host and the majority are stabbed right in the back for their hospitality and kindness.

For as long as we allow them to exploit our good nature, they will exploit it. Therefore, one must develop a hard heart when faced with faux bleeding heart stuff for those sorts.

Consider also (on top of everything else mentioned) an ACLU Jewish attorney by the name of Katie Schwartzmann threatened to sue the Town of Ponchatoula, Louisiana unless it removed a Christmas Cross annually displayed in the centre of the town.

The mayor was forced to acquiesce, explaining to a local TV station: “We don’t have the money to fight the ACLU. These kind of lawsuits are very expensive.”

In concert with the ACLU in its relentless war on Christmas, is the powerful Jewish Lobby, the Anti-Defamation League, known as the ADL, led by Abraham Foxman.

Foxman and the ADL have infiltrated our public schools with one of its many curricula, this one called, the “December Dilemma” program.

But December has NEVER been a “dilemma” for Americans until the ADL has made it so…teaching youth that with SO MANY (yeah, sure) “holidays” being celebrated throughout December, that any public celebration of Christmas would be an act of intolerance.

But where is the ADL or the ACLU when the 40 foot Hanukkah Menorah is put up on the White House Lawn every year, lit by Talmudic rabbis flanked by a Jewish Head of State and even accompanied by the US Air Force Band playing for the Jews, “I Have A Little Dreidel?”

No, not a peep out of the ADL or the ACLU. No “intolerance” cited by the ADL nor the ACLU’s favorite lie, “Separation of Church & State.”

J

 

Oh look the bigots can't back up their bigotry. Just scared of Jews nd being all Nazi.

 

One day you will make either a coherent point, or say something on topic.

One day.

 

I am surprised the ACLU has never sued to have the official Constitution in the Archives rewritten to take the word LORD out of it.

Also many state constitution's PREAMBLES refer to a GOD or Superior being.

 

So can Congress require you to abide by the rules of the Catholic Church? Or the Muslim Faith? Can you be denied the right to hold federal office if you do not hold certain religious beliefs? Can Congress give tax money to religious organizations for religious instruction? Can Congress give preferential treatment to members of one faith over another?

Article VI section 3 of the Constitution

The two sections of the Constitution above, do in fact create a wall of separation between Church and State.

 

What about lawsuit's challenging 42 USC 666? Some have been filed complaining of having to obtain a SS# to get a driver's license is the Mark of the Beast and is forbidden.

 

The wall is a one way wall. State is not allowed to effect church, but church (through the actions of individual members, not it's hierarchy or leaders) can effect state. Ending slavery was an example of church effecting state.

 

It's not a one way wall. Sure religious beliefs of the citizens can inform the decisions of the government, when the citizens choose their representatives. But would the Constitution allow the majority of Congress if they were Catholic, to enact a law that banned the eating of meat on Friday's? Would not such a law give primacy to the Catholic religion over all others?