Not the Pledge but Lying is Unconstitutional
by Hilmar von Campe
Linking their question to the recent decision of the 9th Circuit Court, which declared the pledge of allegiance to be unconstitutional, Human Events asked 11 United States senators the following question: "Would you confirm an atheist to the Supreme Court?" The weekly published the answers in its edition of July 15 of this year. They are most revealing. It is a factual question, which a great number of Americans, however, might think to be aimed at getting information on the religious beliefs of the members of the most powerful and selective club on earth. But that is not so and the editors of Human Events know that. Their question goes to the heart of the reason for the existence of the United States and of keeping the civil rights of the American people.
Senator Robert Bennet, Republican from Utah, answered: "Sure. I don’t think that a person’s religion one-way or the other, should be a disqualifying situation. There should be no religious test for national office…" To the follow-up question "Senator, the Declaration of Independence says that our rights come from God. Can someone who disagrees with that idea effectively protect our rights?" he answered, "I think that he or she could intelligently interpret the law without agreeing with that particular phrase…and…if that jurist doesn’t happen to believe in God, he or she would still be capable of interpreting the law intelligently."
Senators McCain and Nelson had not thought about this issue, Senator Sarbanes and Cleland refused to answer, Senators Hatch and Kyl said ‘it depends’, Senator Johnson considered it to be a hypothetical issue. Senators Inhofe, Miller and Nickles answered no.
Senator Inhofe reasoned in the following way, "…To me, that totally contradicts everything that this country is founded on – including our constitution, including our original oaths of office…" I agree with this senator. Because what he says is objective historic reality. Senator Bennet expresses wishful thinking.
God is not a religious
man-made concept. He is existential reality. He is the creator of the
universe and all of us. His truth is the root of all objective law. He
does not depend on our consent but everybody is free to believe it or not.
But if you deny his reality, then indeed you enter the sphere of man made
religious speculation, and everything becomes relative. In politics it
leads to arbitrary manipulations of power, in the interpretations of the
constitution, the laws and in legislation to arbitrary fixings. An
atheist, distinctive from an agnostic, is somebody who actively fights
God. Therefore he or she denies absolute truth. He is like a thief who
denies others their property rights and cannot be a judge.
No atheist and no agnostic can be a Supreme Court judge without inflicting severe damage on America. The state of this abortion-infested, promiscuous and greedy society shows the devastating results of fighting God. How does anyone fight God? By destroying the obedience to His commandments or watch this being done by somebody else without doing something about it. You become a collaborator of godlessness. There were too many of this kind of people in Germany. That was the reason for the rule of the Nazis.
How do you love God? By obeying His commandments and standing up for truth. Not complicated!
The cause for the battle in the senate for the Bush judiciary nominations, regardless of the arguments used, is the attempt to install judges who advance the agenda of shutting out God and His commandments permanently from American society and transform a free America into a socialist European-style conglomerate. Let’ see free men and women stand up and fight!
Download the printer friendly file for this article.
Download Adobe Acrobat Reader.