Hillary Clinton’s War on Christianity

This country is facing an election where neither of the candidates is admired much. There is a strong demarcation of the values of the two sides, although it is not evident in the media.

Wikileaks has been putting out various e mails that were hacked, with the Democrats declaring it a Russian plot to get Donald Trump elected. Like most of the talking points that the progressive socialists they are mostly lies.

In socialist countries, the media, controlled by the government decides what information the public receives. In our country it is the major media in collusion with the government who tells us what to believe. If you are strictly getting your information on this election from the mainstream media, you do not understand the ramifications of these leaks and what they have done to this country. A leak from Wikileaks points to an e mail from Bill Ivey to John Podesta on March 13, 2016. In the email is the statement that they have be quite content to demean government, drops civics, and produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. Look at our education system and media and you will understand what has befallen the citizens of this country. Ivey even went so far as to state that unawareness among voters is a positive for the Clinton campaign. The Clinton plan is not to move the country forward it is to move the government forward, intruding in every aspect of the citizens everyday lives with that same public unaware.

Another group mentioned in the leaks are Catholics. Calling those with a religious foundation in their live backwards . Ms. Palmieri wrote” the conservative movement within the Catholic church is a bastardization of faith…They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and totally unaware of Christian democracy”. I have been a Christian for most of my adult life, and have spoken to many pastors, and elders in many Christian churches. Christianity is based on the Bible. Perhaps to the modern Christian this may not mean anything, but I know a great many people of all ages who believe that the Bible is, in fact, the word of God. What is in the Bible is true, and infallible. Of course, to those in this administration you see it this way, you are a bigot, a homophobe, and belong to the past, to be seen with contempt for the belief that morality is important, and the faith is a guiding principle in life. Sorry, Ms. Palmieri, I read the Bible and if it is in the Bible, I believe it. I guess that makes me contemptible as well. But this attitude, once again from those who feel they are superior to Christians and can tel all the people how to run their lives and beliefs is not surprising. After all, even Hillary Clinton has proclaimed that those of the Christian faith” will have to change their religious beliefs to expand abortion. The laws have to backed up with resources and political will” Clinton said, and deep seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and biases will have to change”.

Now there are groups formed by Podesta under the auspices of George Soros who are trying the divide Catholics along the lines of abortion and contraception. Podesta has called the Catholics a”middle age dictatorship.” Once again, Catholics and those of Christian belief will be persecuted until they declare no more. It is time for all Christians to speak out and to take action to put an end to this persecution. We need to force groups like the Soros funded ” Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good”,” the Quixote Center”, and the “Catholics for a Free Choice” to shut down. Funded to the tune of $4.6 million by Soros, these groups believe in abortion for all reasons and until full term, contraception and full benefits for homosexual couples. They are not in any shape true Catholics. Many can’t even tell you anything about the Bible. They must be made to understand the Bible is God’s word. It says what it means and true Christians believe it.

Christians are not the type of people who will change their faith on a whim, just look at the genocide in the Middle east. Hopefully it will not get that bad here, but Christians who have true faith will not support you, and will not bend their knees to your global decrees. It might be wise to understand that Christians were here long before you, and have battled Islam before, and we will be here long after you are gone.

HilLIARy has attacked key teachings of the Church (starting with her pro-abortion stance), and she has also expressed an attitude towards Christians that can only be characterized as contemptuous, imho.

I do not see how any good decent person, including any believing Catholic (or Protestant, or Jew) could possibly vote for HilLIARy.

having said that, many people who claim to be Christian will vote for her anyway. This is why we need to get every possible DT-voter to make sure to cast his/her vote. It is very important. Is DT perfect? Absolutely not. Nobody I’ve met is perfect. But, he is the better of the two choices, better by far imho. A “Voter’s Guide for Serious Catholic Voters” published a few years ago says it better than I could,
Some things are always wrong, and no one may delib-
erately vote in favor of them. Legislators, who have a direct vote, may not support these evils in legislation or programs. Citizens support these evils indirectly if they vote in favor of candidates who propose to advance them.
Thus, to the greatest extent possible, Catholics must avoid voting for any candidate who intends to support programs or laws that are intrinsically evil. When all of the candidates endorse morally harmful policies, citizens must vote in a way that will limit the harm likely to be done.” (Catholic Answers Press of San Diego, 2012).
As you might expect, the booklet went on to list its authors’ ideas of the most intrinsically evil positions (starting with abortion). But the idea is that DT does not have to be perfect to vote for him, given HilLIARy’s positions and attitudes.

Thanks for considering.

The current Administration and the Clintons and their supporters are so out of touch with our Constitution's own formula for freedom that they view those who advocate a return to the idea of Creator-endowed liberty to be regressive. That's the "progressive" wisdom. Now, let's examine that view.

The "media" strategy which presents "regressive" as "progressive," "backward" as "forward," and "down" as "up." On and on it goes.

It's a strategy which goes deep into the decades-long effort to "fundamentally change" America from its new and revolutionary foundations in Creator-endowed liberty backward into the Old World and later Marxian ideas of control by imaginary human grantors and protectors.

Perhaps an answer to the once-asked question here on FR: "Why does Christianity 'scare' . . . ?" may lie in the degree to which the foundation ideas upon which America's Declaration of Independence were laid and from which the concept of Creator-endowed individual liberty and the Source from which that liberty is derived have been removed from "the American mind" (Jefferson).

Perhaps the so-called "progressive" enemies of freedom understand better than those who fancy themselves as "conservatives" that in order to reverse the Founders' ideas of "People over government," and institute "government over People," they must first marginalize and destroy the ideas from which liberty is derived.

The writings of America's Founders are replete with references which rebuke would-be tyrants and cite a Higher Source for life, liberty and rights. Early histories confirm those facts.

As so-called "progressives" have led a movement in forsaking the Founders' "reliance on Divine Providence," and belief that individuals are "endowed by their Creator," they also have forsaken the principles underlying America's Constitution and Declaration of Independence, and are systematically dismantling the greatest protections for liberty ever established for a people.

"Ideas have consequences"(Weaver).

The ideas of 1776 came out of a set of ideas consistent with liberty.

We tend to forget, or have never considered, that other world views, including some prominent in today's headlines, existed then, as now.

Unless today's citizens rediscover the ideas of liberty existing in what Jefferson called "the American mind" of 1776, we risk going back to the "Old World" ideas which preceded the "Miracle of America."

There are those who call themselves "progressives," when, in fact, their ideas are regressive and enslaving, and as old as the history of civilization.

Would suggest to any who wish an authentic history of the ideas underlying American's founding a visit to this web site, at which Richard Frothingham's outstanding 1872 "History of the Rise of the Republic of the United States" can be read on line.

This 600+-page history traces the ideas which gave birth to the American founding. Throughout, Richard Frothingham, the historian, develops the idea that it is "the Christian idea of man" which allowed the philosophy underlying the Declaration of Independence and Constitution to become a reality--an idea which recognizes the individual and the Source of his/her "Creator"-endowed life, liberty and law.

Is there any wonder that the enemies of freedom, the so-called "progressives," do not promote such authentic histories of America? Their philosophy puts something called "the state," or "global interests" as being superior to individuals and requires a political elitist group to decide what role individuals are to play.

In other words, they must turn the Founders' ideas upside-down in order to achieve a common mediocrity for individuals and power for themselves.

So, the still-revolutionary idea stated by both Ryan and Romney in the 2012 campaign about the Source of our rights became fodder for the now-current President's disdain, when he declared that the ideas they were espousing were "reruns" from the 20th Century and better suited for "black and white" television. (Actually, Mr. President, those ideas were from a time much earlier than that.)

As Jefferson wisely observed:

"History, by apprising the people of the past, will enable them to judge of the future; it will avail them of the experience of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to defeat its views."

All of which reinforces our conviction that the ideas of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution are as revolutionary and objectionable to tyrants as they were in 1776 and 1787!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.