Official Religion Not Coming to Missouri…So Chill
Posted by Adam Graham in : ChristianityRadical Russ had headlines up at his place and Pam’s the Headline: “Missouri proposes making Christianity the official state religion”
Russ wrote:
The fact that anyone could even propose such legislation is a high-water mark in the chronicles of the emerging Americal Taliban effort to institute Constitutional Theocracy…
From Bible Belt Pagans:
If this is passed into Law, it may be precedent for such a thing to happen in every state in the Nation… or at least in every state in the Bible Belt… which would not be a good thing for us Neo-Pagans!
Indeed, it’d be a quite serious issue and I’m not in favor of States making Christianity the official religion. But are they? The article that’s cited says:
Missouri legislators in Jefferson City considered a bill that would name Christianity the state’s official “majority” religion…The resolution would recognize “a Christian god,” and it would not protect minority religions, but “protect the majority’s right to express their religious beliefs.
The resolution also recognizes that, “a greater power exists,” and only Christianity receives what the resolution calls, “justified recognition.”
Wow, it all sounds so sinister. But what does the actual resolution say:
Whereas, our forefathers of this great nation of the United States recognized a Christian God and used the principles afforded to us by Him as the founding principles of our nation; and
Whereas, as citizens of this great nation, we the majority also wish to exercise our constitutional right to acknowledge our Creator and give thanks for the many gifts provided by Him; and
Whereas, as elected officials we should protect the majority’s right to express their religious beliefs while showing respect for those who object; and
Whereas, we wish to continue the wisdom imparted in the Constitution of the United States of America by the founding fathers; and
Whereas, we as elected officials recognize that a Greater Power exists above and beyond the institutions of mankind:
Now, therefore, be it resolved by the members of the House of Representatives of the Ninety-third General Assembly, Second Regular Session, the Senate concurring therein, that we stand with the majority of our constituents and exercise the common sense that voluntary prayer in public schools and religious displays on public property are not a coalition of church and state, but rather the justified recognition of the positive role that Christianity has played in this great nation of ours, the United States of America.
This is a resolution. Its not a bill, its not going to affect legislation. Indeed, this is more a “sense of the Missouri Legislature” resolution.
This appears one of the most irresponsible pieces of Yellow Journalism I’ve seen in my life. The bill is somewhat vague, but the reference to Christianity is under the most extreme situation, the christian Majority is determined as a “Whereas” not a “Be it resolved, Missouri’s Official Religion is Christianity.” Nowhere is “official religion” found in the bill.
The reporter tells what can only be interpreted as a bald-faced lie in saying the resolution doesn’t respect the rights of the minority as the resolution says, “while showing respect for those who object” in regards to the Majority acknowledging God.
Also, quite deceitful is the concern over the words “justified recognition.” In context, its recognizing Christianity’s role in the Nation’s founding, not saying Christianity is the only recognized religion in the state.
When we say official religion what comes to mind? Shia Islam in Iran and Sunni Islam in Saudia Arabia. What we really have here is a sense of the legislature resolution. Either the Reporter, Mr. Mills was being deceptive or he took the ADL’s word for it on this. Either way, he deserves a reprimand or suspension for this grievious misinformation.
Props to Christians Who Think (and read bills before commenting on them) for looking at the resolution before firing off a response based on an inaccurate news piece.
Update:
Russ admits that there’s, “Is it an Official Proclamation of State Christianity? No. Does it forbid the worship of other religions? No.”
He considers it all a step towards that. He writes:
Admit it. You’d freak out if California passed a reolution promoting Scientology, Buddhism, or any religion aside from Christianity, even if it wasn’t any sort of legally binding bill.
Wow, what if it were another religion being recognized. I mean, what would I do if the White House issued a release on a government website recognizing Eid. Oh wait, they did and I remember what I did. Nothing.
What if they issued a proclamation for Hanukkah. They did and my response was nada.
Russ then writes:
Why does a government entity need to be saying *anything* about one religion or another? The only purpose it serves, besides demagoguery and rilin’ up the Bible-thumpin’ voters, is to tell everyone in the state that Missouri thinks Christianity is neato keen
Why do Mayors proclaim Gay pride days? We issue a lot of proclamations and pass sense of the Congress Resolutions. See the White House’s big list of proclamations for a sampling.
Sometimes they’re to raise awareness, other times they’re done to honor a part of the community.
If issuing a proclamation or sense of the legislature Resolution is the first step to theocracy, its quite slow acting. Its been 23 years since Ronald Reagan proclaimed 1983 “The Year of the Bible“.
Linked to Conservative Cat, Blue Star Chronicles Uncooperative Blogger, Wizbang, Jo’s Cafe, Basil’s Blog, Don Surber, Right Wing Nation, Bullwinkle Blog, Church and State, Outside the Beltway, Stop the ACLU, Is It Just Me?
![SaveForMike.com [Grassroots]](http://www.christianevents.co.uk/saveformiketicker.png "SaveForMike.com")
Comment by Chris S [Visitor]
It’s always funny to me how these articles don’t include links to the full text of the legislation in question. Why can’t we read it for ourselves? Instead, I had to dig through the Missouri website to find it (which wasn’t that hard, but still).
Comment by Michael [Visitor]
The piece was a fraud. There are lies by commission, omission, and obfuscation. Good for you for seeing through it Adam .
Comment by "Radical" Russ [Visitor]
Whew! That’s a relief. For a minute there I thought a state legislature was saying that Christian school prayer in state-mandated education systems and the Christian Ten Commandments in state-run public institutions were hunkey-dory.
Oh, wait. That’s exactly what they just said.
But I’m glad you’re cool with it. So, when say, Dearborn, Michigan, with its huge Muslim population, decides to recognize its majority religion in a “sense of the council” City Council resolution, you’ll have no problem with that, right? When they want to issue the Muslim call to prayer five times a day through the public school intercom system, that’ll be fine, just so long as the Muslim students are bowing toward Mecca *voluntarily*.
This is yet another American Taliban attempt to proclaim “Hey, most of us are Christians! We get to enjoy a special status in America! Y’all are free to worship your false religions, as long as you all acknowledge that we are a Christian Nation and that Christianity is superior to all your false religions. Our religion is the reason why America is so great! Hurray for Jesus!”
Is it an Official Proclamation of State Christianity? No. Does it forbid the worship of other religions? No. But this is the first baby step toward that. Why does a government entity need to be saying *anything* about one religion or another? The only purpose it serves, besides demagoguery and rilin’ up the Bible-thumpin’ voters, is to tell everyone in the state that Missouri thinks Christianity is neato keen
The strangest thing to me in all this crumbling of the wall between church and state is that the wall exists to protect religion from government, not the other way around. Tony Campolo put it this way: “Mixing church and government is like mixing ice cream and cow manure. It doesn’t ruin the cow manure.”
Admit it. You’d freak out if California passed a reolution promoting Scientology, Buddhism, or any religion aside from Christianity, even if it wasn’t any sort of legally binding bill. Take any of your Christianity arguments, substitute the word “Islam”, and see how you like the sound of it. (This is a variation on my “substitute ‘President Hillary Clinton’ for ‘President George W. Bush’” test I give righties when they defend Bush selling ports to the UAE, or illegally wiretapping, or torturing prisoners, or invading a country illegally, or not finding WMD, or vacationing while New Orleans is washed away, or reading “My Pet Goat” while the Towers are struck, or outing a CIA agent during wartime, or setting record deficits, or not testifying under oath to the 9/11 Commission, or holding secret energy meetings with Big Oil, or just losing $8.8 billion in Iraq… you get the idea…)
Comment by Adam Graham [Member]
Quite frankly, there are probably already resolutions out there recognizing the role of Islam, Buddhism, and others passed in City Councils or State Legislatures.
Comment by K T Cat [Visitor]
Fools! The theocracy is upon us!
Comment by K T Cat [Visitor]
Dang! The comments filter just ruined the joke. Sigh. They just don’t pack the same punch when you have to explain them.
Please visit this link for something that might make you smile:
http://ktcatspost.blogspot.com/2006/03/mask-has-fallen.html
Comment by Susan Hendrix [Visitor]
I am writing about House Concurrent Resolution No. 13 sponsored by Rep. David Sater R- Cassville, and co-sponsored by Rep. Barney Joe Fisher, R-Richards. I saw the article by Tim Townsend and Matt Franck in the 3/3/06 online edition of the St. Louis Post Dispatch. What do Rep. Sater and Rep. Fisher have in common? Well I remember that the school district in Purdy, Missouri was sued by the ACLU for prohibiting dances on school property a few years back. From what my daughter says, her fourth grade teacher was related to someone in the House. My son also started out this school year as a student in Mrs. Burch’s class at NEVC R1 elementary (the Missouri district that still has “heat issues.”) Mrs. Burch taught my son that the Missouri state tree was used to crucify Jesus Christ. Although he could not name the tree, he could tell you if you look closely at the white flowers, you will see a red cross inside. The red on the cross represents the blood he shed for us. NEVC R1 allow the Gideon’s in the elementary school to distribute bibles. BOE meetings are all begun, invoking the name of Jesus Christ in every prayer. The issues in this district are systemic, but I am just mentioning a few violations. Well, NEVC R1 received a letter from the ACLU a few weeks back. This may be why Rep. Sater and Rep. Fisher are attempting to establish Christianity – and it must be noted that they are intent on Protestant Christianity as the state religion. I was raised in an Episcopal church and my eldest daughter went to a Catholic elementary school. I guarantee, these beliefs are anti to those they are attempting instill in our public schools.
Comment by Adam Graham [Member]
Susan, read the bill. It doesn’t do what you’re talking about.
Comment by Michael [Visitor]
This is a variation on my “substitute ‘President Hillary Clinton’ for ‘President George W. Bush’” test I give righties when they defend Bush selling ports to the UAE, ….
Radical Russ
Yet another lie. President Bush did not sell the ports to anyone. In fact, the ports were never for sale. Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. (British corporation) sold to
The UAE . Part of the sale includes control over shipping facilities at 6 US ports. This is just another example of how radicals lie about the specifics of an issue.
For those who don’t know the specifics, all the Bush administration did was sign off on the deal after it passed
unanimous approval by the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. Congress then had 30 days to object but not a single member cared to file a complaint.
Comment by Andrea Graham [Member]
I believe it’s a dogwood tree you’re thinking of.
Comment by PHS [Visitor]
This is an excellent post, and an excellent explanation of the reality of this resolution. I imagine it would shock many of our liberal friends to actually open up the history (the true history, not the rewritten version I see everyday in my public high school history classroom) of the early states to read just how “isolated” our founders wanted religion to be from government. Well said, Adam.
Comment by Aaron Parmet [Visitor]
Article 1 Section 7 – Missouri Bill of Rights
“no preference shall be given to nor any discrimination made against any church, sect or creed of religion, or any form of religious faith or worship.”
Comment by Adam Graham [Member]
Thanks, PHS.
Comment by Tim Knutson [Visitor]
Thank you for being honest and objective. As a ‘historic’ Baptist I would be completely against any attempt at government to place themselves on ANY side of a religious argument. The First Amendment was enough. However, after actually reading the resolution, it is nothing more than recognition of a historic fact and population statistics. If we are establishing state religion, count good Baptists out. If we are acknowledging that has been Christian influence in this country, I’ll be the first to stand and give examples! Thanks again for objectivity.