Nancy Pelosi Says Separation of Church and State Concept was a Mistake

This is PROOF that the concept of “separation of church and state” in our constitution as put forth by liberals IS A LIE. One of 3 major pillars of the communist/progressive agenda is to remove religion from America. They have already infiltrated churches and succeeded in forming a split. Now they must USE religion to advance their agenda. Nancy Pelosi knows nothing about the Bible. She knows nothing about God’s will. For her as a GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL to stand in front of clergy and tell them to PREACH FROM THE PULPIT a message that advances the progressive government agenda is so absolutely, positively hypocritical as to be sickening.

So, from this point on, consider the artificial restrictions on when and where you can pray, what you can say about God, putting up religious displays, etc. to be null and void. When some person ignorant of what the constitution REALLY says attempts to stop you or tell you that you can’t do that because of the “separation of church and state”, then show them this video and tell them Nancy says it’s OK. Preachers, feel free to preach for or against political topics or candidates from the pulpit as God’s word and Holy Spirit lead you. It’s OK. Nancy told you to. The cat’s out of the bag, and the genie is out of the bottle. Thanks, Nancy.


2 Responses

  1. I have a post up today about James Madison’s views about the separation of church and state that you might enjoy.

  2. Interesting post, but I believe it may be blurring the distinction on what separation of church and state was intended to mean, and how it is being construed and applied by the left today.

    The intent was that the government not force a religion upon anyone, as had been done in many European countries, but not prevent the free exercise of any religion as long as it was peaceful (did not harm anyone, i.e. human sacrifice, torture, etc.). The intent was NOT to swing to the other end of the spectrum occupied by the Soviet communists who forbade ANY religion, and the worship of anything other than the state.

    The left is (mis)interpreting this concept such that they seek to prevent ANY display of religion in public. No prayer at schools or sporting events, no religious displays in government buildings, etc. But it’s funny how this “standard” is selectively applied. They won’t invite Franklin Graham to pray at an event, but they will invite a muslim imam. They cancel national day of prayer observance, but have a special gathering and prayer service for muslims at the White House.

    Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying muslims shouldn’t be allowed to practice their religion (as long as it is as they PUBLICLY claim it to be: a religion of peace). But followers of the religion have demonstrated behaviors incompatible with western sensibilities and values in the treatment of their women, and the poor human rights record associated with the religion. Whether all muslims support these actions I can not say. But the majority have remained silent when followers of their faith have committed atrocities in the name of allah.

    It is just a bit hypocritical when the left threatens lawsuits if a group of students wants to pray at the flag pole, but they allocate TAXPAYER MONEY to build foot washing stations and other accommodations for a specific religion. Is the difference that most Christians won’t kill you if you insult them? I don’t know.

    But back to the issue. Why are those who use the modern interpretation of “separation of church and state” (no public display of religion whatsoever) so adamant about removing religion from the public square? Religion, even those I don’t subscribe to or believe in such as Buddhism, provide a moral framework that is largely acceptable to most of the world, and provides standards on right and wrong. Perhaps that is exactly the problem. The values of most religions are often at odds with those in government who wish to exercise an increasing amount of control in our lives. Removing the moral foundation from our society will make us that much easier to manipulate. The communists and progressives of the last century in America thought that to be true, and stated that discrediting and removal of religion was one of their primary goals.

    So, by twisting words and obfuscation of the original intent, an agenda has been forwarded.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: