The TOTAL TRUTH Solution for a Fractured America
Big Picture Answers for America's Big Problems -
Rebuilding on America's Original Worldview

by Leonard Ransil

Section 4: America Founded on a Christian Worldview
Chapter 33     Sanity Trumps Justice Black's Infamous Seven Decrees

An earthquake is rumbling across America. Courageous people like the late Dr. D. James Kennedy, and Bill Donahue and Bill O'Reilly have been creating tremors for years as they document the revisionist lies the ACLU uses to deny America's Christian heritage and to suppress all public religious expression. Fortunately, a majority of Americans, believing that we are one nation under God, are finally pushing back rather than choosing to remain apathetic doormats.

One tremor that has been conspicuously under-reported by the secular media came from the 6th Federal Circuit Court of Appeals on December 20, 2005. Judge Suhrheinrich ruled against the ACLU in a bombshell case involving the hanging of a display in a county courthouse. The group sued over a display entitled "Foundations of American Law and Government" which included the Ten Commandments along with other historical documents.

In ACLU of Kentucky v. Mercer County, Kenutcky, the court stated, "Were we to focus on the perceptions of individuals, every religious display would be 'necessarily precluded so long as some passersby would perceive a governmental endorsement thereof.' Thus we find unavailing the ACLU's own assertions that it finds the display offensive... 'People may take offense to all manner of religious as well as nonreligious messages, but offense alone does not in every case show a violation.'... Our concern is that of the reasonable person. And the ACLU, an organization whose mission is 'to ensure that...the government is kept out of the religion business' does not embody the reasonable person."

Citing numerous legal precedents, the court further explained, "The ACLU's argument contains three fundamental flaws. First, the ACLU makes repeated reference to 'the separation of church and state'. This extra-constitutional construct has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state. Our Nation's history is replete with governmental acknowledgment and in some cases, accommodation of religion. There is an unbroken history of official acknowledgment by all three branches of government of the role of religion in American life from at least 1789. After all, 'we are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being'. Thus, state recognition of religion that falls short of endorsement is constitutionally acceptable.

"Second,... 'Simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the Establishment Clause'."...

"Third, the ACLU erroneously-though perhaps intentionally-equates recognition with endorsement. To endorse is necessarily to recognize, but the converse does not follow."

"We will not presume endorsement from the mere display of the Ten Commandments. If the reasonable observer perceived all government references to the Deity as endorsements, then many of our Nation's cherished traditions would be unconstitutional, including the Declaration of Independence and the national motto. Fortunately, the reasonable person is not a hyper-sensitive plaintiff. Instead he appreciates the role religion has played in our governmental institutions, and finds it historically appropriate and traditionally acceptable for a state to include religious references, even in the form of sacred texts, in honoring American legal traditions."

ACLU, Stop Your Stupid War

As with President Reagan's challenge to Soviet President Gorbachev, it is about time that the tremors of truth begin to tear down the fabricated wall of religious oppression, this time in America. Thomas Jefferson, the author of the misinterpreted "separation" phrase penned in a private letter to concerned Baptists, approved and attended church services in the U.S. Capitol and Treasury buildings while he was President. Would he not be pleased that free religious expression in private and public circles is on the rise-thanks to People Power?

Secularists incessently try to impose their godless "freedom from religion" agenda like they have successfully done in Europe. But now, it is high time for the valiant majority who are still thankful for, wish to preserve and publicly express America's rich religious heritage founded on Christian principles to stand up against these "thought police" . "In God We Trust", not man. If you are offended by some "religious expression", this wise court says be a "reasonable person … not a hyper-sensitive plaintiff" and get over it.

In other words, Mr. Secularist, do the same thing you expect Christians to do (chill out) when you desecrate the crucifix in urine just because you call it a "free expression of an art form" - and have the gall use their tax-payer dollars to foot the bill.  Why should anti-God artists be allowed to promote their secular worldview in publicly owned museums when you say pro-God people can't have crosses in publically owned cemeteries that anti-God people may see as they drive by?  Come on, Mr. Secularist, be reasonable and tear down this absurd wall that you have fabricated from a fiction.  Stop the war that you started! 

To read the full Court of Appeals decision:

Total Truth = Big Picture Thinking
I welcome your questions and comments: