Kim Davis is officially on her way to jail because she refuses to comply with the laws of the land. Judges say that her religious objections do not permit her the right to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples. A recent Huffington Post article reflects this view with it’s title, “Can Sarah Palin be Denied a Hunting License Based on Religious Beliefs?” This type of logic is the direct result of our ridiculous American obsession with so-called freedom of religion and separation of church and state. There is no such thing as freedom of religion, and the church can never be separated from the state. These forgotten truths are why we have the Kim Davis saga today.
God Himself came to Earth and established one single religion that all mankind was commanded to follow under pain of eternal death. God does not force us to accept this religion during our time here on Earth, but how insane are those people who run around saying we have the freedom to practice any religion we want!? How blind those poor souls must be that they are willing to exchange a few infinitesimal moments of so-called freedom on Earth for an eternity of never-ending suffering and death. No, America, we are not free to choose any religion we want. We are commanded under pain of everlasting punishment to accept and follow the one true religion which was established by our Lord Himself.
The truth that church cannot be separated from state is the link that ties freedom of religion to the Kim Davis story. Religion is an all-encompassing facet of life. Someone cannot practice their beliefs at home, and then turn right around and contradict those beliefs at work. This course of action serves as proof that the person doesn’t really believe what they claim to believe. Any so-called Christian who sacrifices their beliefs by separating their religion from their work is no Christian at all. If a Christian were to choose such a route, they would not be separating church from state at all; they would simply be substituting a different church to be united with the state. Despite all the different religions we encounter, there are actually only two religions in existence. One is the religion of truth, and the other is the religion of lies. It may seem strange at first, but Liberalism is absolutely a religion, and it is absolutely the religion of lies. Liberalism says that our human laws are greater than God’s divine laws, and this is the greatest lie that mankind has ever contrived.
Because Americans are incessantly clamoring for their precious freedom of religion rather than preaching the truth that there is only one true religion, we have now completely swallowed the lie that we possess the right to practice any religion we wish. And when we aren’t practicing that one true religion, we are de facto practicing the only other religion in existence–the religion of lies. So when Huffington Post asks if Sarah Pailn can be denied a hunting license based on religious beliefs, or when judges order Kim Davis to be incarcerated because she refuses to adhere to the religion of lies, they are missing the most fundamental point: We have to pick a side in the battle between truth and lies. There is no in-between. It is impossible to separate our religion from the state, so we have to choose to let either the one religion of truth be our guiding light, or we can let the religion of lies lead us down the terribly dark and chaotic path to destruction.
TomNaegeleBlogs 
You should run for political office.
Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S® 6.
Thanks Bernie. I’ll consider it.
If you run for an elected office, you should uphold existing law or fight to change it from a legal standpoint. You can’t randomly select which laws you will abide by and which laws you will not. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that equal protection also allowed equal marriages.
Sure you can. An unjust law is no law. An elected official who upholds and defends an unjust law is a criminal.
One unjust law is a law that allows direct taxation. However, if you commit an act of tax evasion, you are going to jail. So, your point that you can disregard an unjust law arbitrarily is invalid. Clearly you lack a basic understanding of the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause. Equal protection should translate to equal marriages. Some discrimination is a good thing, however, where do you draw the line? Here’s an example: If someone had a movie store that sold exclusively LGBT type movies, would that not be discriminatory against people who do not like that kind of thing? Now, if you had a store that was geared to a greater audience genera wise, what if you had fewer people who visited that store because of a disagreement with the political persuasion of the movie stars? Religious opposition is understandable in the context of not wanting to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples, however, if you selectively chose which laws you would abide by, that would lead to societal disruption.
About taxation law, you’re right it’s unjust. But I can and should pay my taxes because it is not objectively or morally wrong to pay taxes. When an action is not objectively immoral, prudence must be exercised. If I refuse to pay my taxes I’ll go to jail and ruin my family. So I pay an unjust amount of taxes and commit no moral fault.
Homosexuality is an entirely different matter. It is objectively an immoral act, and in fact it is one of the worst crimes a man can commit. Under no circumstances is it ever permissible to condone homosexuality in any way. It would be better to die than to offer one iota of support for this terribly immoral act.
From a tax standpoint, if we had a flat tax, I believe that you should not be forced to hand over more than 15% of your income, unless you don’t make enough from a federal standpoint to pay income taxes. Since marriage is defined as an interpersonal union, it should not matter who any person marries. If you don’t want to marry a person of the same gender, don’t do it. For people who object to same-sex marriage, the solution is simple: Don’t marry a person of the same sex. You never directly answered me when I asked you if it was fine for people to discriminate against other people in the context of a movie store. Should people be free to discriminate as to what movies they specialize in?
It does matter who any person marries. Homosexual marriage is a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance, so my gay neighbor is essentially asking God to destroy my country. Also, gay marriage is a detriment to society in a thousand different ways. It’s entirely unhealthy and dangerous, it teaches man to gratify his every sexual urge simply for his own personal pleasure, it permanently damages every child who is involved in such a union, it makes a mockery of traditional marriage which is the backbone of all society, and it turns men into devils.
As far as a movie store, you can specialize in whatever kind of movies you want, as long as the films are moral. LGBT movies are objectively immoral, so it would be a sin for anyone anywhere to sell such movies at all. We should discriminate against sin, in other words.
Tom Naegele, obviously, you are not gay, however, if you were, you would not like being told that you could not marry a person of the same biological sex even if you wanted to. LGBT movies being immoral-you are absolutely wrong. If God hated gays and lesbians, he would not keep creating them. People claim that god hates gay people, however, if this was the case, why would he keep creating them? People have done things that are heinous, using God’s name to justify their agenda, like the Islamic radicals who attacked the World Trade Center 2 times. Ultimately, it boils down to a matter of personal freedom and freedom of association. People who claim to value equal treatment under the law, however, want to mandate their values upon people whose values are different, are hypocrites.
God doesn’t hate gay people. And God doesn’t create gay people. Someone may have temptations towards homosexual acts, but he doesn’t have to act upon them. God never allows any temptation that is too strong for us to overcome. We have to do away with this silly notion that people are born gay and can’t do anything about it. People may, for various reasons, have temptations to be actively gay, but how does that prove that homosexual actions are moral? I may have temptations to hate my neighbor, so does that mean I am born a hateful man and there is nothing I can do about it? Nonsense.
I don’t want to mandate my values upon anyone. I want men to be reasonable while following the natural law. Every other course of action is immoral, unreasonable, and deadly.
Tom Naegele, we are all of God’s creation-gay people and straight people. So, your claim that God does not create gay people is false.
Tom Naegele, as a follow up, legally speaking, a Clerk of court who refuses to comply with a ruling that same-sex couples have the right to legal recognition of a marital relationship has these options: 1: Fight to change the rules legally. 2: Resign from their post. These are the only real options. Either uphold the law as it exists or fight to change it. You can’t ignore a law just because it is inconvenient or unjust. Tax law is a good example. Either fight to change laws legally, or take advantage of every legal loophole and deduction to reduce your tax liability.
Keep on speaking the Truth Tom. You would be a Great Leader and help change our Country back to Moral Standards. God Bless! Andrew Chiti