Dobson: Trump would 'unleash
Christian activists to fight for beliefs', Famed
faith leader writes about candidate's comments to pastors, leaders by Bob
Unruh, 8/3/16, WND
GOP presidential nominee Donald
Trump would “unleash Christian activists to fight for their beliefs” if he is
elected this fall, according to Dr. James Dobson, founder of Family Talk radio and an adviser to presidents. In a commentary
published on WND, Dobson, who earned his Ph.D. at the
University of Southern California and is the author of more than 30 books,
wrote about a meeting he attended between Christian leaders and Trump several
weeks ago.
He
previously was quoted after that meeting
saying he believed Trump had come “to accept a relationship with Christ,”
repented of his sins and been “born again.”
Dobson, who previously had supported
Sen. Ted Cruz’s candidacy, endorsed
Trump during the Republican National Convention. He said at the time it was not only because of his “great
concern about Hillary Clinton,” but also because he believes Trump is “the most
capable candidate to lead the United States of America in this complicated
hour.” Can mainstream Americans really beat liberals? Here’s
the how-to outline, in “Waking the Sleeping Giant.”
In his commentary, which also will
appear on the Family Talk website, Dobson wrote that he asked Trump at the
meeting about what he would do to restore and protect the rights of
Christians in America.
He wrote: “I said, ‘Mr. Trump, I’m
sure you know that the Pilgrims came to our shores in 1620, seeking freedom to
worship as their consciences dictated. Their passion for Jesus Christ became
ingrained in the American soul, and greatly influenced our Founding Fathers as
they formed a new government in the 18th century. These men wrote and passed
the historic U.S. Constitution, and added to it a Bill of Rights shortly
thereafter. It consisted of 10 Amendments guaranteeing specific liberties for
the American people. There has never been anything like it in the history of
the world. The first of the 10 Amendments secured religious liberties for all
citizens and provided the foundation for the other nine. In recent years,
however, there has been a growing assault on these rights, notably religious
liberty.
Our Supreme Court has struck down
Bible reading in schools and even prohibited prayer to an unidentified God.
Then, they banned the posting of the Ten Commandments on bulletin boards. From
there, the limitation on religious liberties has become even more egregious.
Most recently, President Obama and Hillary Clinton have been referring to ‘freedom
of worship,’ rather than ‘freedom of religion.’ Do you understand their motive?
They are suggesting that Americans are free to worship in their churches and
synagogues, but not in the public square.”
Dobson said he then
asked: “Sir, if you are elected president, how will you protect our
religious liberties? Will we have to fight another revolutionary war to secure
those rights to worship, think and speak?”
Dobson’s report said Trump was
sympathetic to the plight of Christians whose faith is being misrepresented on
issues of homosexuality, “gay marriage” and abortion.
“I do recall he said it was an
outrage that Christians have been deprived of their rights to speak openly on
behalf of the values and principles in which they believe,” Dobson wrote. “He
was especially exercised by an amendment added to tax code legislation in 1954
by then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson.
“Jerry Falwell, Jr., said Johnson
had rammed this amendment through Congress without public scrutiny. It
seriously limited freedom of religion, especially religious speech, by leaders
of churches and non-profit organizations. The Johnson amendment contained
language that prohibited the faith community from expressing their opinions
about political parties and those seeking power,” Dobson recalled.
“That law plagues us to this day.
Trump rightly condemned the legislation, which muzzled those of us who would
otherwise use our influence to support our beliefs. He called that provision
‘unfair,’ and promised to overturn it if he is elected.”
Dobson wrote, “That would have a
great impact on Washington because it would unleash Christian activists to
fight for their beliefs.”
The
Obama administration has a history of referring to
“freedom of worship” instead of “freedom of religion,” as the Bill of Rights
state.
It was early in Obama’s tenure that Catholic
Online and other media outlets reported what
appeared to be a deliberate misdirection regarding what the Constitution
requires.
Catholic Online noted that in
President Obama’s June 2009 speech in Cairo, Egypt, he spoke of a Muslim
America and the nation’s “freedom of religion,” but by the November 2009
memorial for the Fort Hood soldiers gunned down by a homicidal Muslim, he was
terming it “freedom of worship.”
From that point, “freedom of
worship” has become the term of choice, the report said, even though the
administration has backtracked in one instance. In that case, Leon
Rodriguez, director of the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services, said in a letter to Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla.,
that the agency now is accepting “freedom of religion,” in addition to “freedom
of worship,” as a correct answer to the question, “What are two rights of
everyone living in the United States?”
Lankford had asked for the change
because of the agency’s use of “freedom of worship” on a naturalization test.
“On June 26, 2015, I responded that
there were no plans to change the naturalization test or study materials,”
Rodriguez told Lankford in a letter. “Upon further consideration, however, we
have determined that making this change is feasible because it is a change in
terminology rather than an addition or deletion of test content.”
Lankford charged during a
congressional hearing that the government was “misrepresenting” the First
Amendment.
“We in the United States actually
have freedom of religion, not freedom of worship,” Lankford said.
See his
comments:
“The questionnaire civics test,” he
said, “has in it one of these things, ‘What are two rights of everyone living
in the United States, and it listed out six different things: freedom of
expression, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to petition the
government, freedom of worship, the right to bear arms. I’d love to see
‘freedom of worship’ switched to ‘freedom of religion.'”
Sarah Torre of the Heritage
Foundation said the difference is significant. In practice, the “freedom to
worship” seldom has been challenged or even questioned, even in dictatorships
like Cuba. But “freedom of religion” is under direct fire. WND has complied a Big List of
Christian Coercion about this very topic.
Catholic Online said of the issue:
“Let’s be clear … language matters when it comes to defining freedoms and
limits. A shift from freedom of religion to freedom of worship moves the dialog
from the world stage into the physical confines of a church, temple, synagogue
or mosque. … It … could exclude our right to raise our children in our faith,
the right to religious education, literature or media, the right to raise funds
or organize charitable activities and the right to express religious beliefs in
the normal discourse of life.”
Thousands of pastors have told their
congregations what the Bible says about the positions held by electoral
candidates and then informed the IRS of their actions without
sparking a reaction.
As WND founder and Chief Executive
Officer Joseph Farah explained
in a commentary in 2008,
Congress was pushed by then-Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson, D-Texas, in 1954 to adopt
regulations for the IRS that ban churches from endorsing candidates.
“Under the First Amendment, Congress
has no power to tax churches. Period. End of story. Under the First Amendment,
Congress has no power to stifle freedom of speech. Ever since 1954, the
government has unevenly applied its illegitimate oversight of churches –
winking as some pastors turn their churches over to political candidates to
make stump speeches, while warning others it is inappropriate. There is only
one real solution – repeal the Johnson Amendment,” he wrote.
That’s the goal of pastors who
participate in Pulpit
Freedom Sunday, an effort of the Alliance
Defending Freedom. The annual event, begun in
2008, encourages pastors to openly preach on the “biblical perspectives on the
positions of electoral candidates.” They also sign a statement agreeing the IRS
should not control the content of a pastor’s sermons.
“The Johnson Amendment commissioned
the IRS to be a ‘speech cop,’ a role it should not have,” said ADF Litigation
Counsel Christiana Holcomb. “This law was specifically designed to silence
public criticism of a politician. That’s clearly in conflict with the First
Amendment. Political retribution to protect the powerful has never been the
basis of good law.” The
restriction came about because of what Johnson
saw as a solution to his own political problems.
In 1954, Johnson was facing
opposition in his re-election bid from Christians and anti-communists, some of
whom were speaking their minds freely from the pulpits. Johnson, a powerful
figure in the Senate who would later become John F. Kennedy’s vice president
and succeed him following the assassination in 1963, had a solution for his own
political predicament – to muzzle churches and clergy with federal regulations.
Through what became known as “the
Johnson Amendment,” the U.S. Congress changed the Internal Revenue Service
code, prohibiting non-profits, including churches, from endorsing or opposing
political candidates.
“This most regrettable action has
haunted America ever since,” Farah wrote. “Over the last 50 years, America’s
churches have been controlled and intimidated by these hideous IRS regulations.
They’ve been neutered. I blame the clergy for so timidly falling in line with
the illegitimate government restrictions as much as I blame the government.”
http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/dobson-trump-would-unleash-christian-activists-to-fight-for-beliefs/
No comments:
Post a Comment