Monday, October 1, 2012

The Not So Subtle "Freedom of Worship"

If there is any consistent tactic in the leftist's strategy to undermine society and move its own progressive agenda forward it is this: The redefining of words to strip them of their original meaning and intent. Freedom of Worship, instead of our Freedom of Religion, is now being used in Obama's attempt to restrict our faith. Since his speech in Cairo a few years back while speaking to the Muslim community, both Obama and Clinton have used this phrase consistently. Though seemingly innocuous to many, this redefinition of our Freedom of Religion has caught the attention of those of us that have paid close attention to what Obama says as to what he does.  And they don't mesh.

At first glance, Freedom of Worship does not seem to worry many citizens. Why should it? It calls for us to be guaranteed the right to worship as we please. So what's the problem? If our Freedom of Religion is watered down to Freedom of Worship, our faith will then be able to be restricted and controlled by the state. Once our religious freedom is replaced with a freedom to worship, our faith would now be fair game to be manipulated and controlled. Though free to worship, our faith could then be restricted to our homes and within the walls of our parish church while banned from the public square while being told, "See? You can still worship all you want, just as long as it is done in private". This would completely contradict the very reason the first immigrants came to our shores in search of religious freedom in the first place and fly in the face of our nation's founding fathers original intent in securing our Freedom of Religion.

It's been said that the government is buying millions of rounds of ammunition from manufacturers in preparation for an eventual uprising by the people should economic collapse occur. Possible? Maybe, but not very probable. As others have said, I think it is more in terms of restricting our right to bear arms. Yes, we will be able to own a gun, but try to find the ammunition with which to use it if there is a shortage of rounds. Our right to bear arms would have been neutered. This is precisely what this so-called Freedom of Worship will do also should Obama be left to his own devices.

The freedom to worship is only a part of our religious freedom and not the whole. Our freedom to practice our religion tells us we can believe and express this belief as we see fit and as dictated by our faith, and that does not mean merely to worship God on a Sunday. It also guarantees that are consciences are protected from being forced to do something our faith considers immoral. The founders understood this and too many today do not.

Religious convictions were part and parcel in the founding of are country. They were not excluded from public debate as our nation wrestled with how to best proceed in securing a nation that guaranteed the rights of its citizens. We as Catholics, faithful to the Magisterium that is, are an obstacle to this Obama administration. We stand in the way of his ideology of promoting abortion, SSM, infanticide and contraceptives in a manner  he deems necessary, even if it means coercing us through executive order or legislative means in order to achieve his goals. To achieve this end, the Catholic conscience needs to be hamstrung and delegated to the privacy of our homes and churches and out of the public eye and square. That is what Freedom of Worship will do. We enjoy and are guaranteed Freedom of Religion and our worship is part of that. Not the other way around.

Those of us who are not of any faith within a traditional belief or any belief, should also be very worried at what this administration is trying to do with this freedom we have, for if our Freedom of Religion can be decimated bit by bit, so can our Freedom of Speech. Once these two freedoms are restricted, all of our guaranteed freedoms are up for grabs. Watch what Obama does and do not listen to what he says. It has been shown that he will lie to get what he wants. It is in what he does that tells us what are truly his intentions for our freedoms, especially our Freedom of Religion. Again, they do not mesh at all.


  1. \\This would completely contradict the very reason the first immigrants came to our shores in search of religious freedom in the first place\\

    Not quite true.

    The Separatist Puritans came to New England for religious freedom for themselves only and to do unto others as they perceived they had been done unto.

    Those who were not members of the established Congregational Calvinist church had no civil rights. This included Anglicans, Baptists, and others.

    And remember that in many colonies, Catholics were not allowed to vote or hold public office. These rights were even withheld in Maryland for a while.

  2. I agree that restrictions were placed on faiths other than their own, but the point of their coming was to escape their own persecutions they had experienced and establish their own 'church' in the colonies free from an official state religion. There was no 'one' faith in the colonies which everyone had to adhere to. Each had their own for a while and remained suspicious of each other until sometime later they began to recognize and respect to a point, other faiths around them. Yes, Catholics had a very hard time early on in this country since most of the colonies were Protestant, but by the time the Declaration of Independence came to be, a Catholic by the name of Charles Carroll of Carrollton (September 19, 1737 – November 14, 1832) was himself a signatory of this document. Remember, once the colonies united and declared themselves free from England as a nation, and then drew up the Constitution, religious freedom was a guaranteed right.

  3. Did you know that the second Soviet Constitution guaranteed "freedom of religious belief and anti-religious propaganda"--and the third modified it to "freedom of religious WORSHIP and anti-religious propaganda"?

    The Soviet Encyclopedia defined "church" as "a body of believers organized solely for the purpose of worship"?

  4. I agree that this shift from 'religion' to 'worship' is a dangerous thing for exactly the reasons you pointed out, Ordinary Catholic. But I also feel that the 'sentiments' of the religious people have contributed to this mindset-- and is probably one of the reasons there are not more people alarmed.

    At some point, we became embarrassed of being 'religious.' We believed that we were doing Christianity a favor by adopting the nice-nice view that being 'spiritual but not religious' was doing God a big favor. We wrongly assumed He needed our help in public relations. ;) I see this all the time in both the protestant and Catholic Churches. I have been guilty of it myself-- God forgive me!

    Christ and His Church do not need my help in painting His message and Truth in a more palatable manner. I am finding out that it takes guts to be religious. Obama et al have their agenda, to be sure. I am sorry that many of our religious people have helped him achieve the goal.

    Good post. :)

  5. HH, in a country where we elect our leaders through a democratic process, we cannot escape the responsibility that is partly ours when our leaders do not work out very well. You are right. If we as citizens had not strayed or become complacent about our faith and stood up for the Truth we proclaim to believe, I do not think the situation in our country would have gone as far as it has. If a judgement is to be made on our nation, then we all bear some of the guilt.


Your comment will be posted after reviewing. Thank you