Atheist Group Seeks End to Tennessee Police Department’s ‘Adopt a Cop’ Prayer Program

JCPD-compressed
Photo Credit: Facebook

JOHNSON CITY, Tenn. — A prominent professing atheist group is seeking to put an end a Tennessee police department’s “Adopt a Cop” program, which invites local residents to pray for members of the city’s police force.

The Wisconsin-based Freedom from Religion Foundation sent a letter on Tuesday to the Johnson City Police Department to object to the program. The initiative involves assigning an officer to those who sign up for the effort, who in turn promise to pray daily for the officer’s safety and well-being, as well as to send him or her a word of encouragement.

The program, which was launched in November, has garnered support from area churches, and is believed to be an offshoot of the International Transformation Network’s national program, led by Ed Silvoso.

“There can be tension between law enforcement and the community, and so morale can be down. The families of officers are under tremendous stress, [and] everyday an officer has no idea what the job will look like,” organizer Becky Haas told local television station WCYB. “So I think we’re kind of in step with what a lot of other communities are doing to let our police know how much we appreciate them.”

But FFRF says that the effort is unconstitutional since it is derived from a Christian program and encourages prayer.

“While it is admirable to look out for the safety, emotional strength, health, wisdom, stability and character of your officers, it is not appropriate for the JCPD to do so through a religious program that is not actually providing any protection for your officers, but only wishing for it in the form of Christian prayers,” staff attorney Andrew Seidel wrote to Police Chief Mark Sirois.

“JCPD’s participation and advancement of this Christian ‘Adopt a Cop’ program is problematic,” he continued. “It is a fundamental principle of Establishment Clause jurisprudence that the government cannot in any way promote, advance or otherwise endorse religion.”

  • Connect with Christian News

FFRF subsequently asked that the Johnson City Police Department remove itself from participation in the program.

“JCPD should focus on programs that actually make a difference in people’s lives rather than expending any department resources for ineffectual Christian programming,” Seidel wrote.

It is not known whether Chief Sirois intends to respond.

Jedidiah Morse, the author of the first textbook on American geography, stated in 1799, “In proportion as the genuine effects of Christianity are diminished in any nation, either through unbelief or the corruption of its doctrines, in the same proportion will the people of the nation recede from the blessings of genuine freedom and approximate the miseries of complete despotism.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Nidalap

    Come on, y’all are from Tennessee! Stand up to them! Do it very publicly too! It will likely only increase your popularity among your local community. You know, “Country boy can survive” and all that! (^_^)

    • Frank Dorka

      That’s right. Use tax dollars to fund a fight that you know you cannot win. FFRF and the ACLU will eat you up and spit you out.

      • Nidalap

        Could be, but if we only fought battles we were assured we would win, where would we be today? 🙂

        • Frank Dorka

          Not sure, but do you think atheists, agnostics or people other than Christians are willing to pay for this fight? Somehow, that doesn’t seem quite American, let alone, Christian.

          • Nidalap

            Ooh, goody! Let’s just put it to a vote then! (^_^)

          • Frank Dorka

            Oh, the old “majority rule” card, eh? Did you know that the Constitution protects the individual over a tyrannical majority?

          • Nidalap

            Oh goodness yes! That’s why we never vote for anything, here in America! (^_^)

          • Frank Dorka

            You must think that your vote counts for something here in America. Even the President is elected by other means than “majority rule”. Best example, George W. Bush.

          • Nidalap

            Ha! Still whining over THAT? If Al Gore had managed to carry his own State (Hey look, Tennessee again!), he would have been President instead! (^_^)

          • Frank Dorka

            Funny that you believe in tyranny by the minority. Do you know how small the numbers of atheist and agnostics are when compared to “believers” in this country. That is why it’s amazing that we win the majority of the cases we seek out. That says a lot about us…and the Constitution. Doesn’t say a lot about your team.

          • Nidalap

            Tyranny? Nope, takes a person steeped in relative morality to go for that. That’s why would-be tyrants and dictators play to those types. They’ll agree to hand over all kinds of power if they’re told that their friendly government is going to take their ideological foes down for them…

        • tatoo

          Probably with a better school system because the money you lost comes from that budget.

          • Nidalap

            Ha! Schools oddly don’t seem to get all that much better no matter how much money you throw at them! Ask them how much it’ll take to get the job done. The answer you’ll get is always “more…”.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Yes, while government school spending per student has skyrocketed, performance has plummeted. I can provide the stats on that later on.

    • Lucid

      You seem really smart.

      • Nidalap

        Aw! Thanks! And, from someone who portrays themselves as ‘lucid’, that’s saying something too! (^_^)

  • http://ianbrettcooper.blogspot.com/ Ian Brett Cooper

    Seems a pretty open and shut case as far as I can see. The First Amendment mandates that government, in this case in the form of a police department, cannot endorse any religious sect. If it does, then it has to endorse EVERY religious sect. Does the community want to be paying for police officers to work together with Satanists so that the Satanists pray to Lucifer to keep police from harm? I doubt it. But hey, if they want to, go right ahead. Hail Satan!

    • bowie1

      Perhaps like waht Jedidiah said, that makes you a despot who wants to impose your own dictatorial rule over what others do, not unlike those of ISIS.

    • Representative

      Satanists don’t pray for nonSatanists to be protected so you are categorically wrong. Secondly, `people from the community wanted to pray for any cop that allowed it. This has nothing to do with the First Amendment because the cops were not forced to do anything. So you’re wrong.

    • afchief

      That is a boldface lie!!!! The right to freely express one’s faith is an unalienable right. Unalienable means CANNOT be taken away. It’s like skin color, or height, or dare I say it, sexual orientation. You is what you is and it cannot be changed. (I spoke that way so the Christ-haters can accuse me of being ignorant.) That is what unalienable means.

      The right to pray is unalienable. The First Amendment calls it “free exercise.” The God-haters (and their cops) like to point us to the “establishment clause”, but “establishment” and “free exercise” are connected by “or”. Sort of like love and marriage used to “go together like a horse and carriage” you can’t have one without the other. You still remember when marriage was marriage, don’t you?

      Free exercise cannot be inhibited by lawyers or judges. If it is restricted, it is not “free” exercise. Technically only Congress can take away the right to pray, and they are expressly forbidden to do so. In case you’re interested, here is the pertinent section of the First Amendment:

      “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”

      • MarkSebree

        Actually, you are wrong about that. If one is representing the government, one cannot “freely express one’s faith”. That is a violation of the Establishment Clause because the government, which you are embodying at the time, is not supposed to have a faith.

        If one is a military leader, then one cannot freely express one’s faith either, and especially cannot proselytize, around or to one’s subordinates. That is against regulations, the UCMJ, and again a violation of the Establishment Clause. The military is secular, and no religion and no specific religion is required to be a member of any military branch.

        Basically, if you are in a position where you are representing the US Government, you are constrained by law and the Constitution from “freely expressing your faith”.

        Also, you do not have the right to freely express your faith when it intrudes on someone else’s right to freely follow their faith. As the old saw goes, your right to follow your faith ends at the tip of your nose.

        When you are on your own time, yes, as an individual, you have the Constitutional right to follow any belief system you want, or none at all. But you do not have the right to use a governmental position of authority to impose your beliefs onto your subordinates or the general public, and you do not have the right to impose your faith onto anyone else in general.

        • VirtualCoach

          You are willfully forgetting an important part of the story: Nobody is “imposing” any faith or religion on anybody here. It’s VOLUNTARY.

          • paulvalery

            So I can voluntarily say that my tax dollars won’t be used for this purpose? Or are these costs being “imposed” on non Christians as well? That’s why it is an issue. Believe whatever you want, but when you have to make those that disagree with you pay as well, that’s unamerican. Keep it private and nobody can say a word about it. But if you want others to pay to prop up your beliefs expect blowback. Why do Christians need these giveaway freebies?

          • MarkSebree

            Actually, they are imposing their beliefs onto others. There are members of the team that fear to come forward with their complaint about this action, as well as fear of not joining the prayer circle, because they fear the repercussion of doing so. That is a direct example of the prayer circle imposing their faith onto other members of the team. That is why those cadets went to the MRFF with their complaint in the first place.

            Additionally, the actions of the cadets violate Air Force regulations against exactly this sort of action. And, since they are representing the military, and thus the government in a very public manner, they are also subject to the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution. They, as representatives of the US Government, are endorsing a particular religious belief, and thus promoting the establishment of that belief.

        • afchief

          Nope! You are quite wrong!!! The right to pray is unalienable. The First Amendment calls it “free exercise.” The God-haters (and their cops) like to point us to the “establishment clause”, but “establishment” and “free exercise” are connected by “or”. Sort of like love and marriage used to “go together like a horse and carriage” you can’t have one without the other. You still remember when marriage was marriage, don’t you?

          The courts and their legal miscreants have separated the terms. Establishment doesn’t trump free exercise. Free exercise cannot be inhibited by lawyers or judges. If it is restricted, it is not “free” exercise. Technically only Congress can take away the right to pray, and they are expressly forbidden to do so. In case you’re interested, here is the pertinent section of the First Amendment:

          “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”

          Saying a prayer after a football game does not establish a religion. Only Congress can do that…but they can’t. These police are engaging in “free exercise.” If Congress can’t establish a religion, how can a police department establish one?

          • paulvalery

            If they do it on their own time there isn’t a problem. But if I have to pay someone to pray 5 times a day to Mecca, I have a problem with that. Don’t you?

          • afchief

            Yep, if it interferes with their job. We Christians can pray anytime and anywhere while still doing our jobs. We don’t need a time, prayer rug or to face to mecca when praying.

          • paulvalery

            Sure! Pray any time you want! Nobody will say a word. Use government time to write a letter, on government paper, and have the government pay to send out the letter? Now all of a sudden, you aren’t so independent, right?
            Nobody will EVER complain about a christian going to church on Sunday. As long as they aren’t on the government clock as well (that’s theft, and I’m sure you don’t support that). If you have to force other taxpayers to cover the costs of your praying, you’re breaking the law. Not so difficult to understand, right? And we both would expect the same if it came to a police chief that was Muslim, or Hindu, or anything else. Our tax dollars are NOT to be used to promote your particular beliefs, or anybody else’s. Why do some christians have a problem with that? They would scream like mad (rightfully) if the city/county/state spent money promoting Islam, right? But not christianity? That’s called “hypocrisy”, isn’t it?

          • afchief

            What are you talking about? We Christians can pray silently to ourselves with no one hearing us.

          • paulvalery

            I don’t think I could have been more clear…
            Did you read the article?
            The problem is NOT ABOUT PRAYING. Read it.
            It’s about the “Adopt-a-cop” program.
            A government PROGRAM.
            How many government programs can you name that cost NOTHING.
            If this program has costs, you are forcing ALL to pay for the beliefs of SOME.
            It’s really simple stuff. Civics 101.
            Try to put the shoe on your own foot, as I said earlier: If there was an “Adopt a cop” program suggested in your town, which funded prayers for the local muslim community, would you be ok with your tax dollars being spent that way?
            If not, why would you expect any less from others?
            If you are ok with it, that’s a different perspective altogether. If you want to fund every religion on earth, good luck with that. Our choice is none, or all. I’ll choose none, and you can pray silently to yourself, and everybody is happy, right?

          • afchief

            So what? The “adopt-a-cop” program; “The initiative involves assigning an officer to those who sign up for the effort, who in turn promise to pray daily for the officer’s safety and well-being, as well as to send him or her a word of encouragement.”

            It interferes with nothing!!! People are praying for these cops. Big deal. Get over it.

            Civics 101. THERE IS NO SEPARATION OF CHURCH IN STATE in the Constitution!!!!

            Get over it!!!

          • paulvalery

            Separation of church in state? What the hell is that? If you don’t even know the term, how can you understand what it means?
            And maybe you haven’t read the entire constitution. There’s this branch of government that the document creates, called the judicial branch. And they have enforced the separation of church AND state, every single time, for a couple of centuries. So, your ability to interpret the constitution is better than EVERY SUPREME COURT JUSTICE in our history? Could you be more arrogant? Where do you think the term “wall of separation” comes from? Thomas Jefferson, that’s who. But of course you know more about the constitution that some idiot like him, don’t you?

          • afchief

            The SCOTUS enforces NOTHING!!!! They only render “opinions”. It is congress who makes or changes laws. The right to pray is unalienable. The First Amendment calls it “free exercise.” The God-haters (you) like to point us to the “establishment clause”, but “establishment” and “free exercise” are connected by “or”. Sort of like love and marriage used to “go together like a horse and carriage” you can’t have one without the other. You still remember when marriage was marriage, don’t you?

            The courts and their legal miscreants have separated the terms. Establishment doesn’t trump free exercise. Free exercise cannot be inhibited by lawyers or judges. If it is restricted, it is not “free” exercise. Technically only Congress can take away the right to pray, and they are expressly forbidden to do so.

            You are QUITE wrong!!!

          • paulvalery

            Wow. I take it you didn’t study government much in school.
            You render opinions. That’s not what the Supreme Court does. Why do we need them if all they do is render opinions like every newspaper in the country?
            You have the right to believe anything you want. And the government has no power to do anything about it. You can pray at work, at school, on the highway, in court, any where you want. Where are you coming up with the idea that you can’t?
            What you can’t do is use public property for religious displays. You can’t pay government employees to preach. You can’t, a muslim can’t, nobody can. And that’s a good thing. As a result, we have the most diverse religious culture of any country on earth. Over 30,000 christian denominations alone.
            Let me ask you this, if you aren’t Catholic, do you think that we should pay for a program to promote Catholicism? Or do you think we should have a program to promote Westboro Baptist? You’re all for theocracy as long as it’s christian, so let’s have the Mormons or the Jehovah’s Witnesses take over your kids’ schools, you’re good with that, right?
            Try to use your head. You obviously haven’t studied this seriously, perhaps you can learn something by reading instead of proclaiming.

          • afchief

            I KNOW Constitutional law and you are QUITE wrong. Courts only offer opinions. Opinions can change when judges change. The law cannot be changed by a “judge.” If that were the case, our “laws” would be as constantly changing as the “judges” are. If “judges” ruled that sodomy was illegal in 1986, how did sodomy become “legal” today? Did the law change, or did the “opinions” of the “judges” change?

            Did you know that the Supreme Court once rendered the opinion that black men were inferior to whites? Did you know that the Supreme Court once ruled that women had no legal right to vote? Did you know that as recently as 1986 the Supreme Court ruled that there was no right to homosexual sodomy?

            President Andrew Jackson, in a shot across the bow regarding a Supreme Court ruling in 1832 famously said, “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” President Jackson ignored the decision that the Supreme Court handed down. Congress can also ignore it.

            Get a book on Constitutional law and READ IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Because you are showing your liberal ignorance!!!

            Again, show me where in the 1st amendment that the cops are creating a law? Show me where in the 1st amendment a public servant can establish a religious law???

            “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”

            ONLY CONGRESS CAN ESTABLISH LAWS!!!!

            WHAT DOES FREE EXERCISE MEAN TO YOU?????????????????

            Do I need to educate you on WHY and the intent of our Founding Fathers for writing and putting this amendment in our Constitution?

            Are you really this uneducated?????????/

          • paulvalery

            Well, I guess I’m not as well educated as somebody who knows more than every supreme court justice that ever lived. Like you…
            So, when the court ruled that women couldn’t vote, you’re saying that they actually could? Because the court’s decision doesn’t have the force of law, right?
            Have you ever even KNOWN a law enforcement officer? Ask them if they read someone their Miranda rights upon arrest. Then, show me where that is in the constitution. And if they aren’t read their rights, what happens? It’s just an “opinion” that their arrest is invalid, right? Get a clue, man. I’ll wager $1 that my degree is from a better university than you’ve ever been on the campus of.

          • afchief

            Criminal law is totally different from case law. I would think you KNOW that! Otherwise I’m conversing with somebody totally ignorant on our constitutional law process.

            Please get a book on constitutional law and read it!!!

          • paulvalery

            The ignorance contained in that one statement, and your failure to even recognize it, is telling. You don’t care about the truth , just defending your irrational beliefs.
            “Case law” vs “criminal law”? Really? Do you care that you look that dumb in front of the whole world? And to act as if you’ve actually ever studied anything when it is so obvious you haven’t. The arrogance of most theists is sickening. You only serve to prove my point.
            Try reading more than one book before pretending that you know anything. You’re humiliating yourself, it’s embarrassing.

          • afchief

            More proof that liberalism truly is a mental disorder!!!!!

          • Bob Johnson

            Laws will not change as often as judges change. Judges cannot rule on a law unless someone takes a case to court. The person or group taking a case to court must have “standing”, that is, show that they have been hurt. For FFRF to becoming lawyers for a case, someone must stand up and declare that they have been hurt.

          • Bob Johnson

            Actually, the Supreme Court renders decisions. These decisions are by majority vote of the nine justices. Hence, we, the American people, have decisions that are usually 5 to 4, or 6 to 3. These decisions determine if a law or regulation is in accordance with the Constitution. If the law is found invalid, it is automatically invalid – as if it never was enacted. Sometimes only a part of the law is declared invalid and that portion of the law cannot be enforced.

            The First Amendment also states “or abridging the freedom of speech”, yet the courts have consistently ruled that yelling “FIRE” it a theater is not free speach.

            The court will then write up notes, called “opinions’, to clarify how the decision was reasoned. Both sides and sometimes other judges will write decisions to explain their thinking. Also when the President signs a law, he may include a signing statement and Congress includes notes and the Congressional Record to clarify the laws they send to the President.

          • afchief

            Wrong! Another uneducated liberal!!! They are opinions!!! PERIOD!!!! Who cares what the Supreme Court says? They are merely rendering their “opinion”. For example; The people of Alabama and 30 other states have already spoken on this issue of marriage. No court “opinion” can nullify the vote of the people. Did anyone vote to give Kagan, Sotomayor, and Ginsburg the power to change the institution of marriage? I don’t think so, Tim!

            Who do they think they are? No wait…who do WE think they are? Do you REALLY believe that the opinions of five political hacks on the Supreme Court trump the will of 81% of the citizens in Alabama? I think not. At some point, this is gonna get ugly…and I believe we are nearing that point.

            The right to get “married” based solely on who one chooses to copulate with is one of the most short-sighted “opinions” in the history of the world. Liberty is not licentiousness. You have no God-given right to do that which is wrong.

            Homosexual marriage is not now, nor will it ever be, “legal” in America. You know it, I know it, and heck, even the homosexuals know it. They don’t want to get married…they just want to destroy marriage.

            At some point, if we are to remain free, we are going to have to cast off the chains of government. That’s what our forefathers did. That is what they told us we would have to do.

            Jefferson told us “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” What do you suppose he meant by that?

            It’s called Judicial Tyranny!!!

          • Bob Johnson

            I may indeed be uneducated, but how can you call me a liberal based on what I have said? You have stated several time to get a book on constitutional law. I have looked at several books as well as the websites of various universities and found none that support your position. Could you please specify a textbook where we can understand in greater detail your position? Thank you.

          • afchief

            There are plenty of websites and books on this issue. This website will not let you post websites without their approval.

            Supreme Court Offers Opinion, Doesn’t Make Law

            HomeFounding Principles

            Whenever state laws are overturned by the Supreme Court, such decisions are often cited as repudiation against any sort of argument for their legitimacy. While case law is regularly debated, the court’s constitutional power to make such reversals is rarely questioned. Courtly precedents are usually referenced in support of such actions rather than a constitutional basis.

            But the power to offer opinion does not equal the power to make law. While today, most believe that Supreme Court justices carry an aura of infallibility in doing so, that perception was not always so clairvoyant.

            The Constitution grants very little power to the federal judiciary for a reason. Since British history was rife with treacherous kings who packed the royal courts with those who would innately endorse their aims, the founders embraced the separation of powers doctrine espoused by Charles de Montesquieu for a reason. The judges serve for life to separate them from kingly and pragmatic interests, not for assurances of power.

            The Supreme Court was constructed to adjudicate law for specific cases, mostly disputes among states or situations in which the United States is a party. The high court was assuredly never meant to override law or overturn state law, and even the proponents of judicial review in the ratification conventions never explained this power in relation to overturning state law. How can I assert this with certainty? Because the Constitution’s biggest proponents assured us of this. The proof lies in the states, where the Constitution was defended against some of the most compelling attacks by the Brutus Writings, Patrick Henry, and other powerful voices of opposition.

            These questions should have been answered when John Marshall refuted the apprehensions of George Mason during the Virginia Ratifying Convention. Mason strongly condemned the Constitution because he believed it would allow the nationalists to exploit and annihilate the state courts. Mason said, “There is no limitation. It goes to every thing. The inferior Courts are to be as numerous as Congress may think proper. They are to be of whatever nature they please.”[1] Mason argued that the scope of the cases that would be taken up by the federal judiciary would be virtually unlimited, noting “When we consider the nature of these Courts, we must conclude, that their effect and operation will be utterly to destroy the state governments. The next day, John Marshall disputed these sentiments, noting “The objection, which was made by the Honorable member who was first up yesterday (Mason) has been so fully refuted, that it is not worth while to notice it.”[2]

            It all began with Fletcher v. Peck (1810), where the high court reversed a state law for the first time. This was done under malevolent and confounding circumstances. When Georgia enacted a state law which reversed land sales implicating members of Congress in bribery, the reversal was declared unconstitutional by the John Marshall Court. Essentially, the result was the Supreme Court getting away with passing a law which read: “Georgia’s ability to revoke corruptible land sales is hereby annulled.”

            In Wickard v. Filburn (1942), the Supreme Court made a decision as law by explaining that growing a surplus of wheat was a violation of the commerce clause, and thus the court was allowed to regulate individual production. These decisions were not exceptions; they were the manifestation of the court’s majestically conjured lawmaking power. It is much more common now for the court to reverse state law, while federal law is often strongly endorsed. The court’s statement in this case was clear: “Whatever property rights Ohio’s Constitution affirms, it is our right to cancel them.”

            Many of the founders espoused the view that the Supreme Court was not the sole arbitrator of all constitutional issues, and could not hold such power to make such irrevocable decisions. Thomas Jefferson famously made a political career of opposing the federal judiciary in rendering opinions as law. Realizing that the Supreme Court did not take up any of the appeals of those convicted under the Sedition Act, he drafted the Kentucky Resolution of 1798. Considering the development of the Marshall Court, he wrote that a general judiciary with the power to make such decisions as law was “dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”[3] Jefferson wisely recognized the truth: “The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal” to operate in such a manner.[4]

            The founders and framers delegated most powers of the general government to the legislature. It was done so intentionally, as one house was closely aligned with the interests of the people (The House of Representatives), while the other was representative of the sovereignty of the states (The Senate). When the courts act to create de-facto law rather than by rendering of opinion, they violate the intentional separation of powers doctrine used to diffuse powers not only between separate branches of the general government, but also the paradigm of the general government and the states. When a group of nine judges attempt to make law for a populace of 310 million and settle constitutional questions for all time, they are acting against the interests of the compact of the Constitution. Such a situation is demonstrative of an oligarchy, not a republic.

            [1] The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Volume III, Edited by Jonathan Elliot (Washington: Taylor & Maury, 1861), 476.

            [2] Ibid, 502.

            [3] Thomas Jefferson to William Jarvis, September 28, 1820, in The Writings of Thomas Jefferson: Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports, Messages, Addresses, and Other Writings, Official and Private, Edited by Henry Augustine Washington (New York: Derby & Jackson, 1859), 178.

            [4] Ibid.

          • wandakate

            “IF”, and I did specify “IF” it’s a choice of praying to all or none, I would suggest NONE and then I would still not lose anything as I would just then pray in silence to JESUS who can hear the prayer and do something about it.

          • wandakate

            I would think that depends on what GOD you believe in.
            ALL of these various gods out there didn’t create the heaven and the earth. Only “ONE” GOD can give you life and only “ONE” GOD is capable of taking it away. Can ALL of these god’s do that for you? Of course not. People are deceived and brainwashed. It’s really only common sense that we can have only ONE GOD…all the rest have to be fake.

          • wandakate

            afchief…just look up dear and the prayers are received. Pray in the name of JESUS the only name in which one may be saved as you say and I have been saying here all along, anytime, anywhere, any day of the week.
            It reminds me of a person that plays the piano by music notes only, they can’t play for you unless they have their book.
            Thank GOD for talented people that play piano by ear and they can just sit right down and play you a beautiful song without the book. No book needed, no rug needed, no prayer mat or anything else needed, not even facing Mecca or the sun. JESUS and you, that’s ALL that’s needed dear.

          • wandakate

            I would think there are employers that lose productivity on the job b/c they must stop 5 times a day to pray to Allah or Mecca, or Mohammed, or whoever it is they’re praying to.
            With Christians they don’t lose any productivity whatsoever.
            We can pray quietly without disturbing anybody anytime that we need to go to JESUS in prayer.
            We have free access to Him, praise the LORD, and it’s always going to be that way until we take our last breath…

      • wandakate

        Only Congress can take away the right to pray! UH, EXCUSE ME!!! Since when did they have that right. Prayer can NEVER be or ever will be taken away by anybody, anytime, anyplace, anywhere.
        Christians have immediate access to JESUS our advocate and our mediator to GOD the FATHER…As long as we have a mind that knows what it’s doing, we will have access to PRAYER.
        Congress or the POTUS or the Pope or anybody else can’t remove our thoughts or our prayers. They are private and will always be with us.
        JESUS told us, “I WILL ALWAYS BE WITH YOU, I WILL NEVER LEAVE YOU, I WILL NEVER FORSAKE YOU”.
        Do you believe that?

        • afchief

          Ahhh wandakate are you addressing this to me.

    • jmichael39

      What part of the first amendment applies here? Show me.

  • Mark Moore

    Christians are getting really aggressive with their proselytization. Really want it in everybody’s face.

    • bowie1

      So then why are you proselytizing your own viewpoint?

      • WorldGoneCrazy

        He cannot see it, Bowie. He cannot see the self-refutation of atheists and anti-theists evangelizing their religion nor being intolerant in the name of “tolerance.” He is in utter darkness, searching for an objective purpose to his life, where none exists (on atheism), because the universe is just headed to a slow cold dark death in his view and nothing he does or does not do matters one whit in any ultimate sense. Reduced to that so-called reality, all that is left is selfish hatred toward those who are different from him.

        • bowie1

          Yes…I suppose like knocking on his door, but nobody is home!

    • Proudusagirl

      —> Incorrect Mark. Christians are NOT getting aggressive in trying to convert people. We are just sick and tired of our God being removed from everything. The Atheists even tried to remove prayer and God from Catholic school. If you don’t believe, don’t participate. Why should the Atheists be able to push their non beliefs on everyone else?

      • Frank Dorka

        Sorry, as an atheist, I doubt your word. Tell me wherein any atheist tried to change a Catholic school. It isn’t done. All we want is for you to keep religion out of government. Atheists should have as much voice to their opinion as any Christian. This is a nation built upon equality, isn’t it? I don’t participate when your rituals are held on your own private property, but keep it away from anything paid for by tax dollars. I think you should be called a Lyingusagirl?

      • tatoo

        Removed from everything? Jesus should not have been there in order to be removed. But, I can’t seem to get away from Christianity. I went to the mall yesterday and was stuck with Christmas music and stupid decorations, etc. My gym is in the mall, so Imhave to go.

        • Str8atya

          You sound so tolerant of others. Lol! Must be a rough life going from page to page spewing your hate. See past other people’s personal views and get to know them. That’s what America is all about after all. But to live a life being offended all the time, even just to go to the gym must sad. Maybe a world created just for you and your ideals would be great but we all have to share this place. Focus on you and do good to everyone. Even the ones you don’t think would accept you. You’d be surprised at the friendships you would make. Stop and smell the roses.

      • acontraryview

        “We are just sick and tired of our God being removed from everything.”

        You certainly hit the nail on the head. What some Christians are upset about is that their religion is no longer being promoted and given a place of privilege by government. They are upset that they are being put on par with other religions and those who hold to no faith. They are upset that our laws, that govern all people of all faiths as well as no faith, are no longer being used to restrict the rights of others based upon the Christian belief system.

        In other words, they are acting like whiny, self-absorbed, little children who don’t like sharing.

      • Lucid

        ” The Atheists even tried to remove prayer and God from Catholic school”

        Liar.

    • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

      Boy, I wish that were true. I haven’t had a single soul winner come to my door with a Bible saying “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.” (Acts 16:31)

      Yet I myself got “procelytized” for 13 years in public school to the religion of the big bang and evolution. I have had JWs come to my door with their bologna. I go to churches all over that say “Christian” on the sign or door, but then I hear them say “repent of YOUR sins” to be saved (no verse because the Bible never says that).

      So I don’t know what planet you are living on, but true Christians that believe the Bible are actually virtually invisible where I live….and I live in the Bible Belt (so called).

      • MarkSebree

        The Big Bang and Evolution are not religions, they are scientific theories. Religion requires faith, and is “unquestionable”. It is unchanging.

        Science requires facts, and is constantly questioned and tested, and if any theory is found wanting in the face of new evidence, it is modified or replaced.

        By the way, the Big Bang theory (not the TV show) is constantly being modified and new explanations for many aspects of it, including Inflation, are constantly being worked on and worked out. However, much of this uses extremely esoteric mathematics and very high order physics which are beyond the education and understanding of roughly 99.999% of the world’s population. And no, I am not claiming that I completely understand those mathematics.

        This is why science is so much stronger than religion. Science is based on the real world, and does not require belief to make it true.

        • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

          The big bang and evolution are not scientific in that they do not pass the scientific method, and have never been observed, tested or proven. In fact, they are completely unverifiable, because they are both speculative about events that took place before anyone was there to record them.

          REAL science includes things like physics and chemistry. These are valid forms of science which include testable and provable theorems and laws.

          Evolution and the big bang theory are completely based on faith. That’s why you come to forums like this to debate them rather than science forums.

  • Chris Clayton

    Rather than quote Jedidiah Morse, how about Thomas Jefferson who said the 1st Amendment guarantees the separation of church and state?

    • Frank Dorka

      And the Treaty of Tripoli wherein he wrote that “America is, in know way, a Christian nation”.

      • Chris Clayton

        in “no” way .. just to be clear that he was saying were are not a Christian nation. The Constitution also says there will “No Religious Test” to hold office. Furthermore, the oath for President does not include the “So Help Me God” phrase that has been added by many (but not all). In taking the oath, the second president, John Adams ,put his hand on a law book, not the Bible, which reinforces the fact we have a secular government.

        • Frank Dorka

          From your lips to…Christian ears.

    • jmichael39

      How laughable. Do you even know the context of Jefferson writing that?

    • MamaBear

      “Separation of church and state” was a phrase Jefferson used in a letter to Danbury Baptist Association, assuring them the new Constitution would protect their freedom from government interference. It is not a quote from the First Amendment. What the Constitution does say is, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
      I strongly doubt Jefferson would object to prayers for policemen.

      • jmichael39

        Considering Jefferson not only endorsed, but attended services held in the capitol building…I’m sure you’re right about him supporting prayers for police.

  • Frank Dorka

    Nothing fails like prayer. -Annie Laurie Gaylor

    • Nidalap

      No one stands against prayer like the Tyrant. -Nidalap 🙂

      • Becky

        I will use this ; )

        • Nidalap

          I am honored! 🙂

          • Becky

            I enjoy and respect your written thoughts a great deal, Nidalap : )

          • Nidalap

            Aw! Thanks muchly for your kind words as well! (^_^)

          • Frank Dorka

            Get a room.

          • Nidalap

            Aw! You care! (^_^)

          • Frank Dorka

            I care. Take a condom.

          • Nidalap

            What do you think I am, a middle-school student? (^_^)

          • Frank Dorka

            Your debating prowess, maybe. :@

          • Nidalap

            Well, if that’s what you expect then, “I know you are, but what am I?” (^_^)

          • Frank Dorka

            Not sure, but I am enjoying it. I may not agree, but I will defend.

          • Nidalap

            Okey-dokey, artichokey! (^_^)

          • Frank Dorka

            In a while, ped o phile!

          • Nidalap

            Now, now! We both know you didn’t have to stoop to THAT depth! 🙂

          • Frank Dorka

            Yeah, you are better than a priest.

          • Nidalap

            Ha! I’ll take that as the closest thing to a compliment you’re able to voice to someone of my ilk! (^_^)

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Pedophile, huh? Do I need to break out the stats on the propensity of gays to be pedophiles?

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            No, he thinks you are a kindergarten student who needs to be taught how to use condoms, per the government school system.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Nice!

          • Becky

            Ikr lol

      • WorldGoneCrazy

        “There is no God, and I hate Him.” – atheist

      • WorldGoneCrazy

        That’s good stuff, Nidalap!

  • 201821208_456512019 :)

    “The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God” Psalm 14:1
    ​”​The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they” Psalm 53:1
    “He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.” John 8:47
    “Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed” John 20:29

    • tatoo

      Huh?

  • Becky

    “While it is admirable to look out for the safety, emotional strength, health, wisdom, stability and character of your officers, it is not appropriate for the JCPD to do so through a religious program THAT IS NOT ACTUALLY PROVIDING ANY PROTECTION FOR YOUR OFFICERS, BUT ONLY WISHING IT IN THE FORM OF CHRISTIAN PRAYERS,” staff attorney Andrew Seidel wrote to Police Chief Mark Sirois.” (Emphasis added)

    That’s his mere opinion.

    “JCPD’s participation and advancement of this Christian ‘Adopt a Cop’ program is problematic,” he continued. “It is a fundamental principle of Establishment Clause jurisprudence that the government cannot in any way promote, advance or otherwise endorse religion.”

    Have they legally made it the official religion? Nope. Just because one religion, in this case Christianity, is being specified, it doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t endorse any other religion. They’re not creating any laws that are making Christianity the official religion.

    FFRF attorneys are quick to gloss over the part in our clause that states that the government isn’t allowed to prefer no religion over religion, which is exactly what they’re asking the PD to do…no religion, period.

    • paulvalery

      They are spending tax dollars. Paid by Muslims, atheists, jainists, Hindus, every one. If your tax dollars were used to promote Islam you would be ok with that, as long as it wasn’t a LAW, right?

      • Becky

        Who’s spending tax dollars?? There’s no tax money being spent. Prayers are free!

        • paulvalery

          It’s the “Adopt-a-cop” PROGRAM.
          Do you really want to try to claim that government programs don’t cost us money? That’s how far into denial you are? All in defense of your religion? Why lie? Does your god need your government’s help to protect cops? You really can’t pray on your own? Church isn’t enough? You have to use tax dollars as well? What a weak god you think you have.

          • Becky

            “Adopt a cop” is funded solely by corporations and individuals and it’s a program that helps fund a varying degree of necessities for the PD. It’s tax deductible to the contributors, but it has nothing to do with prayer. However, that’s the crux of the matter…prayer…and the FFRF cage has been rattled, again. According to the FFRF the program is considered “religious”, because of prayer and they believe it’s “an offshoot” of an actual Christian program. The program, per se, doesn’t offer prayer, it’s the citizens who have every right, under the first amendment, to offer prayer to whoever they want. There are no tax dollars being spent for the citizen’s prayers…no one is paying for praying.

          • paulvalery

            I’m almost with you, Becky. If what you say is true, I can see how a program of the sort can function without crossing a line.

            Almost, though, because of your words. First, you said it had “nothing to do with prayer”. Then, not two paragraphs later, you say the complaint is because of prayer.

            If prayer isn’t involved at all, as you said, it should be pretty easy to defend against the complaint, right?

            And if that was the case, the proper defense wouldn’t be “but we can pray how we want where ever we want”, it would be “Prayer? Why do you mention that?”. (I mean, I’ve never been accused of praying, because I don’t. If I was, I wouldn’t say “but I can if I want”, I would say “you must be mistaken”.)But that isn’t the defense I’ve heard from anybody but you. Why is that?

            I apologize for asking, but you must understand, there is something called “lying for the lord”, look it up. Some theists have no problem lying to make themselves seem right, and some don’t deny it. So when I see somebody say two opposite things in the same statement, I have to ask. It’s the skeptic in me. Forgive me.

          • Becky

            Just because the FFRF is complaining about prayer (again), it doesn’t mean that their complaint is legitimate. The PD isn’t doing the praying. The program, which is supported by corporations and private individuals, isn’t doing the praying. It’s private citizens that are praying for the officers/PD. The FFRF doesn’t like it, because, in the words of their attorney, “it is not appropriate for the JCPD to do so through a religious program that is not actually providing any protection for your officers, but only wishing for it in the form of Christian prayers,” staff attorney Andrew Seidel wrote to Police Chief Mark Sirois.”

            The program isn’t about prayer. The program, via corporations/individuals, is about providing bullet proof vests or new vehicles to the PD, for example. Our tax dollars aren’t supporting our PD’s like they use to, so these programs are much needed and, quite honestly, so are the prayers, but, like I said, the prayers are from private citizens and the program or PD is not paying for praying.

          • paulvalery

            Johnson City “Adopt a Cop” program is based off a national program started in California by the International Transformation Network, which “want(s) to see the presence and power of God meet the felt needs and the systemic challenges of our communities.”

            “The employment of chaplains, even if volunteer, demonstrates government endorsement of religion, which is a violation of both the federal and Tennessee constitutions.”

            Becky, a chaplain is NOT a bullet proof vest or a vehicle. How many chaplains do you know that “are not about prayer”, as you said? Is it God that is “meeting the felt needs and the systemic challenges” of providing bullet proof vests? How does he deliver them?

            It sounds like you’re being more than a little dishonest. When the founder of the program says that the program is about the “power of god” meeting needs, it sure sounds like a christian thing to me. Not muslim. Not hindu. Not bah’ai or jainist. Solely christian. That’s endorsing particular religious beliefs, and not endorsing others. Thus the complaint.

          • Becky

            The Adopt a cop program, which you should look up outside of a bias source, is a program that does what I’ve already explained and more. Those involved with asking the public to pray for police aren’t asking the PD to pray, it’s inviting citizens to pray for the PD. That’s not unconstitutional. Citizens can pray for whoever they want. The program, because it has already been established, is used as an avenue to invite citizens to pray, but that’s because it’s the citizens (and corporations) that have been helping to fund PD’s.

            Btw, there’s nothing wrong with PD Chaplains. Ever heard of the Police chaplain program?? How about US Military Chaplains??

          • Lucid

            Just because chaplaincies exist doesnt mean they are constitutional. Christians cross the state/church line all the time, mostly without even realizing it.

          • wandakate

            And round and round you go, and where you stop nobody knows. This conversation is getting boring to say the least.
            You have your opinion and he has his…PEACE be with you to both of you. Time for a break.

          • Becky

            Don’t read it and move on. That’s what I’m doing lol

          • wandakate

            Sometimes people don’t print exactly what is on their mind, they are somehow unable to put it into a perfect written form to the letter. That, therefore can and does happen. Just b/c she said one thing and something else later, doesn’t mean anything, it’s NOT a big deal, doesn’t mean she is lying.
            You are very nit picky and argumentative as well. Apparently you expect people to be perfect and they by far are not, and never will be…lighten up. When we all aren’t perfect, it certainly tells us that neither are you.

          • wandakate

            You are absolutely PATHETIC…and we pray for you, because you don’t know what you’re doing.
            When dying on the cross, JESUS said to the FATHER GOD up in heaven, “FATHER, forgive them for they know not what they do”.

          • paulvalery

            Yeah, I’m pathetic, because I actually take people’s word for what they say. I’m supposed to KNOW that when people say something, that they either mean it, or they don’t, and I should know the difference… Actually, Becky seems to be the most rational person on your side that I’ve read in this discussion, I didn’t expect her to be perfect, but asking for consistency is not being “picky”.
            BTW, isn’t Jesus god on earth in your twisted reasoning? So, he asked himself to forgive his own creation, when he is a perfect, forgiving, being to begin with? And that makes sense to you…

          • wandakate

            NO, not at all. It makes sense to the HRCC, and to many people who believe in a trinity but no not to me. There are many other people who believe they are equal in though but separate.
            GOD was the FATHER in Heaven who is a spirit being…
            JESUS is the Son, and when He prayed, He prayed to GOD the FATHER. JESUS came to earth in the flesh with Mary as HIs mother and Joseph as His father.
            The HOLY SPIRIT was to come after JESUS ascended back to GOD the FATHER.
            The HOLY SPIRIT is also a spiritual being like GOD the FATHER. It was to come, and lead us into ALL truth. It would guide the Christian to what is right and what is wrong.
            It would give them spiritual answers and discernment.
            They were ALL one in like mindedness, but they are still separate in my opinion. My reasoning isn’t twisted either, so save your breath.

        • wandakate

          Praises to the LORD, and YES Becky, our prayers are thank the LORD “free”. They go to JESUS who is our advocate, our mediator between us and the FATHER GOD. It’s not the priest, it’s not any particular church pastor or anybody else, not even the Virgin Mary who is sleeping in her grave. It’s “only” JESUS who takes our “FREE” prayers up to GOD the FATHER for consideration. He speaks on our behalf.
          I don’t recall any tax money involved in this transaction. JESUS said, freely you give, and freely you will receive…
          No matter how hard they try to stop us, they can “NEVER” stop our prayers. They are not only FREE, but they are
          UNSTOPABLE. They can be done, morning, noon, and night. They can be done 365 days per year. There are a few things that nobody on earth can take from us…
          OUR PRAYERS or OUR EDUCATION…they remain with us to the grave. The only things we take with us after our last breath is breathed is our SPIRIT, and our Believe in JESUS.
          Man can kill the body, but he is not able to kill our SPIRIT…

  • tatoo

    Suppose your cop is a Jew or Hindu or, OMG, a Muslim? Are you going to say a Jewish, Hindu or Muslim Prayer? Or do you only adopt Christian cops? Are Christian cops the only ones you pray for? Are other cops worth praying for?

    • WorldGoneCrazy

      Christians pray for both believers and non-believers. We even pray for our enemies.

    • MamaBear

      When I was first diagnosed with cancer, not only did my fellow Christians pray for me, but Jews and at east one Baha’i. The proper response when people of other faiths and religions offer to pray for you is “thank you.”
      BTW – Christians do not limit their prayers only to other Christians.

    • Shifty

      All religion is poison. Hail Odin!

  • JANET MITCHELL

    That Chief should tell FFRF where to stick it. We have FREEDOM OF RELIGION & if they don’t like it them get the heck out of this Christian Nation.

    • gizmo23

      So Jews should also be thrown out of the USA and we should have a state religion?

      • JANET MITCHELL

        Did I say that, no I did not so do not put words in my mouth. When it gets time for His return every Jew will return to Israel & finally accept him as the Messiah. And FYI most Jews are already becoming Christians.

      • JANET MITCHELL

        No your showing your ignorance as usual.

        • gizmo23

          How? If we are to be a Christian nation doesn’t that exclude others?
          It would be nice to have a question answered instead of being insulted. But maybe that is not possible for people with closed minds

    • acontraryview

      “get the heck out of this Christian Nation.”

      The US is not a “Christian Nation”.

      • JANET MITCHELL

        wrong this has always been a Christian nation & always be no matter how much people like you try to make it not be.

      • JANET MITCHELL

        This country was founded on christian principles so if you don’t like it leave.

        • acontraryview

          Then why it is that the protections provided by the Constitution directly conflict with 7 of the 10 Commandments?

    • Lucid

      To have freedom OF religion you must also have freedom FROM religion or there is no real freedom. Even you should be able to understand that.

      • JANET MITCHELL

        If you don’t want to be a Christian then don’t as nobody is forcing you to be one, but that does not mean you have the right to stop forcing others to be one.

        • Lucid

          Nobody is being forced to not be Christian. Are you really that confused? Also, while this country might be a Christian majority it is by no means a “Christian Nation” any more that it is a “White Nation”.

          • JANET MITCHELL

            Oh yes they are when they try to force Christians to accept someones sinful perverted life style choice. And this country was founded on Christian principles.

      • JANET MITCHELL

        You do & nobody is forcing you to be a Christian, but that does not mean you have the right to force a Christian to accept &* condone this sinful perverted life style choice.

  • Reason2012

    How is it a group that calls themselves “freedom from religion” goes around legally forcing their religious beliefs on everyone else: that there is no God?

    “To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.”
    Psalms 14:1

    • paulvalery

      Where did they said that there is no god? Find one place in any of their writings that says that. Anywhere. Or admit you are a liar.
      BTW, isn’t their something about providing false witness in your bible? Or do you ignore that part, too?
      I’ll give you a hint: What’s the opposite of a theist? Theists believe in god. So, the opposite, is an atheist. They don’t believe your claims, because you haven’t provided evidence. If I don’t believe in UFOs, what religion is that? If I don’t believe that there are faeries in my garden, what religion is that? If you want to make up your own definition, and say that “atheist” means that somebody absolutely says that there is no god, then what do you call the opposite of a theist in your vocabulary? You don’t believe in Zeus… so what religion is that?

      • Reason2012

        Where did I say they said this?
        I didn’t.

        But look at their actions. They do go around legally forcing their beliefs on everyone else by attacking all OTHER beliefs and trying to make all OTHER beliefs illegal. Or are you trying to say they have a deep belief in God but are legally attacking expression of that belief any chance they get?

        No, agnostics do not believe in God either – they just don’t take it so far as to claim omniscience that there is no God.

        It’s not enough to claim you do not believe in God, as agnostics do not believe either.

        So if someone who does not believe in God says they’re not sure if there’s no God, that’s agnosticism. If someone who does not believe in God says there is no God, that’s atheism.

        Hope this helps.

        • paulvalery

          I’ll quote you. “their religious beliefs … that there is no God”
          So yes, you did state that atheists believe there is no god. Why lie about it? Isn’t lying against your beliefs?

          I’ll help you out: You can tell me what a christian is, and I’ll tell you what an atheist is. How’s that? Or I can make up a bunch of stuff about Christians, and say that’s what you are. But that’s not fair, is it? I could say that all christians think slavery is good, and prove it with bible verses. Would that mean that you support slavery when you say you are a christian? That’s just not the way it works, is it?

          So, here’s the deal. Theism is the belief in god or gods. Put an “a” in front, and it means the opposite, i.e. no belief in god.

          Gnosticism has NOTHING to do with belief. Again, I suggest you pick up a dictionary. Gnosticism has to do with knowledge. Gnostics believe that information about god or gods can be know. Put an “a” in front, and again, it means the opposite, i.e. information about god/s can’t be known.

          So you can be an agnostic theist, if you believe in god but don’t claim that we can actually know.

          You can be a gnostic atheist, and claim that you KNOW there isn’t a god.

          You can be an gnostic theist, and claim that not only can we KNOW if there is or isn’t a god, but that you believe there is as well.

          Or, last option, you can be an agnostic atheist. That’s one who doesn’t think we could ever actually know if there was or wasn’t a god, but has no reason to believe that there is, because there is no evidence.

          Most atheists are agnostic, like myself. Show us your evidence, we’ll check it out and decide for ourselves. If it is valid, we’ll change our minds. Very few atheists are gnostic, as you claim all are, that claim to know there isn’t a god. Very, very few. Sure, there might be a “god” hiding in the corner of the universe somewhere, how can we know? But when it comes to the specific claims of the religious, then we can say that certain claims are certainly not true.

          So, now that you know what atheist and agnostic mean, maybe you can have more informed discussions. I hope that’s the case.

          • Reason2012

            // I’ll quote you. “their religious beliefs … that there is no God” //

            I’ll quote you again: “Where did they said that there is no god?”
            And I’ll repeat: where did I say they said there is no God?
            I didn’t say a word about what they say or said.

            But you do realize they’re a self-titled “atheist” group, do you not?
            You also realize atheists do not believe in God, do you not?

            // Would that mean that you support slavery when you say you are a christian? That’s just not the way it works, is it? //

            Moot point as their are no verses to support the forced slavery you’re implying, but instead there are verses that condemn forced slavery as a capital crime.

            And someone’s a Christian who claims to believe on and trust in Christ as the only begotten Son of God – the only means of salvation. Specifics other than that doesn’t change if someone identifies as a “Christian” or not, so your analogy is flawed.

            // So you can be an agnostic theist, if you believe in god but don’t claim that we can actually know. //

            Agnostics don’t believe in God, so your claim is false. If they believed a god exists, they’re now theist.

            You do not believe in God, however:

            Do you claim there is no God?
            Or do you instead claim you do not know?

            Those are the two very broad classes of unbelievers that people can easily fit in one or the other, and the two words most commonly used to differentiate one from the other is agnostic and atheist, respectively.

            But you seem hung up on the title. If you claim there is no God, then you’re claiming to be omniscient – and such a person is only fooling themselves to pretend such a thing is fact. If you’re instead claiming you don’t know if there is no God, then it would be silly to go around demanding any mention of God be legally bullied out of society as such action contradicts admitted lack of knowledge on the subject.

            Thank you for posting.

          • paulvalery

            I’m sorry. I assumed I was conversing with a rational being. My mistake.
            If you think you can tell someone else what they think and believe, you are beyond help. You refuse to learn, as you prefer ignorance. I tried to respectfully let you know that what you are doing is wrong, and how. If you are too dense to take it in, I can’t help that.
            You are demonstrably wrong about nearly everything you stated, and you couldn’t care less. Because you think you already know everything. You can’t learn when starting on that footing. So, I wish you luck. Bask in your ignorance. If you don’t know what you’re missing, you can’t miss it, I guess.

  • StanW

    It is amazing that these clowns have formed an organization and spend their time actively fighting against something that THEY claim does not even exist.

    What sad & pathetic people.

    • paulvalery

      So when sharia law is suggested in your town, don’t say a word, because you don’t believe in Mohammed. Good thinking.

      • StanW

        Sharia law is a theocracy. But the only religion you hate is Christianity.

        • paulvalery

          Maybe you should try a dictionary. Theocracy can be christian as well. Do you support christian theocracy, or democracy? And why do you judge me, as hating christianity? Aren’t you the one that believes that to judge goes against your god’s word? I don’t “hate” christianity. I love my country. And we don’t live in a country that allows for you to make me pay for your religious beliefs, and I can’t make you pay for religious beliefs you don’t believe in. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?
          Are you against sharia law? Why? How could you be, if you don’t believe in it? That’s your own words, used against you. Now you can see how wrong you were, can’t you?

          • StanW

            So you keep bashing Christianity and defending Sharia? What a complete IDIOT you are.

            And if you knew anything about Christianity, you would know that we are commanded to judge people.

          • MarkSebree

            Where is he defending Sharia Law?

            From what I can see, he is against the Christian version of Sharia Law being implemented in the USA. Which means that he is not defending Sharia Law.

          • StanW

            There is no Christian version of sharia law. That is the point.

          • paulvalery

            Look up Pope Innocent VII. His “law” regarding witches resulted in what has been estimated to be 9 million being murdered. Maybe you don’t call it “Sharia”, but I’d say it’s worse than anything any Muslim has implemented.
            The religious in the west act as if they are innocent, that christianity has always been peaceful. Now it may be. After centuries of being beaten back from their disgusting theocratic ways. Now you want to act as if your religion is innocent? Read some history. When christians rule, things get very bloody. Theocracy is theocracy. There’s no room for it in our constitutional republic.

          • StanW

            I never claimed Christianity was innocent, many things have been done in the past in the name of Christianity that were and are deplorable. It just amazes me that people like you have to go back centuries in Christian history to find things to compare to what sharia law does TODAY!

          • paulvalery

            I recall the history of christianity, because that is the religion in my country that fails to even recognize their privilege. This country was founded in the wake of a continent destroying itself with christian warfare and abuse. People who didn’t believe were tortured in the most gruesome ways, and murdered, by the millions, we agree. And we don’t want to go back to that, do we? That’s why our founding fathers kept religion out of government. But there are those today that refuse to even recognize the presence of this stuff, much less the potential hazard, and even less than that, the fact that it goes against everything this country was founded upon.

            Sharia law can NEVER be instituted in a country that does NOT allow religion in government.

            We can agree, at least, on some things. When christianity ruled, it was brutal. When sharia is instituted, it’s brutal. We can avoid all of this. In fact, our founding fathers knew the way. They founded a secular government, with no room for god at all in our constitution. Can’t we agree that we are lucky to be living in this country, without religious rules implemented by force, without the ability to even be questioned? And everyone perfectly free to worship what/whoever they wish? Isn’t this a good thing? Why would anyone want to destroy that?

          • wandakate

            Unfortunately it will not always be like this. Things are rapidly winding down to “CONTROL” of the masses. We are going into very soon the New World Order of things and our country will be radically changed for the worse. We are going into the One World Religion where the Catholics and the Muslims will join together and perhaps some Christians will be in that mix, and they will call it Chrislam. It’s part of the new agenda of the Pope and the HRCC. He has met with other headers including a Muslim Cleric, Rick Warren, Joey Osteen as well as James Robison, and Kenneth Copeland. They all met at the Vatican on separate occasions to discuss this new religion which will strive to join the Catholics with the Muslims all under ONE umbrella of faith. We have to remember things are NOT always as they seem.
            We won’t be FREE to worship who/whoever we wish in the future, it will be controlled, just like everything else.
            The One World Government will also make many changes.
            ALL of these things are coming, the news of this is all over everywhere for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear and aren’t blinded to the facts. Those who are spiritually aware, alive, and awake will know the signs of the times are upon us. Keep watch.

          • paulvalery

            I normally prefer to have conversations with people who aren’t batshit crazy, so I will bid you a good day.

          • wandakate

            I’m laughing my head off, some of the words you come up with. You are bidding me a good day, thank GOD for that!!!!!

          • http://www.180movie.com John Wesley

            Then you shouldnt talk to yourself ever….

          • wandakate

            Remember please that not ALL religions were Christian. He ones committing all these things were NOT really Christians…Things are NOT always as they seem.

          • wandakate

            So when you mention the Pope, then you are speaking of the HRCC. That religion was brutal back then, it was from the pagans and the heathens of which GOD warned us to have nothing to do with them. Do not copy their ways, or follow their traditions, yet all of our traditions and holidays today are pagan, ALL of them. Of course there were murders, and vile acts against GOD. Christianity has been peaceful. The Catholics are not necessarily Christians, two different beliefs for the most part. History does tell us that the HRCC persecuted many people.

          • paulvalery

            So, it is members of your particular sect that are “real” christians, and all the others are not.
            Which part of the bible points us toward your ability to judge correctly who is a real christian and who isn’t? Many are called, but you are chosen. How fortunate for you. The odd thing is, I hear that same defense from members of every christian sect on earth. In fact, from members of every religion on earth.
            Christianity isn’t such a large religion then, with your qualifications, is it? In fact, it would be a tiny minority. Certainly, enforcing laws that are only supported by a tiny minority would be as undemocratic as possible, wouldn’t it?

          • wandakate

            EXACTLY StanW…one is from GOD and one if from satan.
            One is pure, clean and good, the other is evil to the core.
            That is the other point…

          • MarkSebree

            No FORMAL Christian version. However, if you listen to the pundits and their followers (like you), they obviously want to implement a Christian version of Sharia Law. They want a theocratic or theonomic government, with their beliefs controlling the government and their religion ruling everyone. That basically translates into a Christian version of Sharia Law. This would be a government and society that would likely make the current crop of far right wing nut cases running for Republican President look liberal, and destroy our country socially, economically, intellectually, and probably physically. We would be invaded and dealt with by the rest of the world was we dealt with Hitler 70 years ago, and for the same reasons.

          • StanW

            The ONLY people I have ever heard talking about a Christian theocracy are cowardly Liberals like you who are deathly afraid when any Christian stands up and reminds the world that WE have rights and we have freedom of religion.

            So get over yourself.

          • paulvalery

            Quote where I “bashed” christianity. Once. Or you are a liar.
            Quote where I defend Sharia. Once. Or you are a liar.
            You want to make it easier for Sharia to become law, not me. I, as well as our constitution, find NO place where religion has a part to play in our government. You want to allow it. You want theocracy. Sharia is theocracy. YOU are the one that agrees with ISIS, that religion should be the law. Not me. Get over yourself.
            You are a proven liar on two counts. Now, do you really want to claim that your bible does NOT say “judge not, lest ye be judged”? I think denying the bible is the only unforgivable sin, isn’t it? Do you think your God can’t see what you are writing?

          • StanW

            I never said sharia or any other religion should rule. And there is nothing in our Constitution that excludes religion from government.

            And the Bible says you will know them by their fruit, so we are to judge people. Again proving you know NOTHING!

          • paulvalery

            So, your bible says that you shall judge them by their fruit, and it doesn’t say “judge not lest ye be judged”? Is that what you are saying? I’d like to know what bible you read, because it sure isn’t the one we studied in my seminary classes.

          • StanW

            So you went to seminary and you don’t know about judging people by their fruits?

            Oops, now you are outed as a liar.

          • paulvalery

            Check the quote, my friend. Matthew 7:16 if you need help. Look very closely for the word “judge”. As we used to say, check yourself before you wreck yourself. You’ve shown yourself to be dishonest, now you project your own shortcomings on me? what kind of fruit is that?
            After you read the book, you can apologize. I forgive you already. You know not what you do.

          • StanW

            Tell me the context of judge not. Because if you think it means that Christians are never to judge, then you are very much a liar.

          • paulvalery

            You believe you have the mind of god. You think that you know what your god thinks, how he judges. But the very book you supposedly respect says just the opposite. You are not worthy to judge anyone. Read the words of your Jesus. You have no idea of what you speak. Do you know what a Pharisee is? What was Jesus’ problem with them? Think on that a while.

          • wandakate

            May I present this suggestion? Let’s strive NOT to call others liars…it’s much more Christian (if you claim to be one that is), to tell people that are mistaken, but to call them liars, isn’t really Christian. We can be nicer and do better as you will after all “Know them by their fruits”, and that includes the way the write and speak.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Exactly! It’s been my experience that those who misunderstand that passage in Matthew to say that it means we are not to judge sinful behavior are precisely the same ones who are mired in sin up to their eyeballs. How convenient of them, not to mention that it is a most hypocritical and self-refuting interpretation of that passage. Here is one of my fave writeups on this misuse of Scripture to support your thoughts (just take the spaces out) – good job on this:

            http://www .str .org/articles/the-judgment-on-judging#.Vmx4GUorLGJ

          • wandakate

            We will judge them by their fruits….NO, it didn’t say that. It says, “AND YOU WILL KNOW THEM BY THEIR FRUITS”, No judging there, but knowing instead…I am a retired teacher, I have studied the scriptures since 1999, and have written 5 manuscripts thus far with one going to press in another week, and you will KNOW and not JUDGE is the correct word.

          • paulvalery

            Keep reading, ignoramus. You’ve got it exactly backwards. The atheist corrected the christian about what the bible actually says. But, you are so prejudiced against people because they don’t think exactly like you that you have to try to attack them even when they agree with you.
            Take a look in the mirror.
            Again, I will accept your apology, but it isn’t needed. I forgive you anyway. I understand. It’s not easy having to defend the defensible every single minute of ones life. I know. I used to be there. I feel pity for you, and hope that some day you may come to see the folly of your thinking.

          • wandakate

            As you judge and spew out hateful words, so will you one day be judged…so I would think you need to check out the mirror.
            I don’t have an apology, and I don’t want your forgiveness, thanks anyway. Of course you don’t understand anything about any of it. I don’t really have to defend anything. If you used to be there but you’re not anymore then I pity you. My thinking is fine…
            I think you’re a paid troll…are you enjoying your job there?

          • wandakate

            NO, hold on it doesn’t say that you shall judge them by their fruit. No, no…what is says is “YOU SHALL ‘KNOW’ THEM BY THEIR FRUITS”. Meaning we will know people by what they DO, by their obedience, by their ways and actions, by their works and their deeds unto others…
            Messing up just ONE word, messes up the entire meaning. StanW stated that you will know them by their fruit, BUT you changed it to JUDGE…be careful how you word the truth and don’t add to it or take away from it, that’s a sin.

          • NGN

            says the guy who believes in talking snakes…LOL!

          • http://www.180movie.com John Wesley

            Read the passage in context…finish the rest of the passage.

            Jesus was not issuing a blanket condemnation against judging but was only forbiding hypocritical judgment. (Like what you are doing hypocrite)

            Judging someone for judging after claiming it is wrong to judge is exactly the sort of hypocrisy Jesus was forbiding in that passage.

            Jesus actually commanded we judge in certain situations…in certain situations it is actually sinful to refuse to judge.

            Also fyi Jesus called peole pigs, dogs, vipers, serpents, blind, fools, children of hell, sons of the devil and also chased peolle out of the temple with a whip of cords. He was far from non-judgmental and he never claimed it was a sin to judge. He forbade hypocritical judgment, not all judgment!

          • wandakate

            Judge lovingly and with good report. We are to love the sinners and hate their sins…
            GOD is LOVE! satan is hate…
            GOD does right, satan does wrong…
            GOD is good, satan is bad…
            GOD is merciful, gracious, loving and forgiving…
            satan is full of hate, as he came to kill, steal, and destroy…
            GOD can save, satan destroys…
            GOD has the keys to His kingdom and the saved will go in…
            satan has the keys to his kingdom and the unsaved will go there…
            GOD leads the path that is narrow…
            satan leads the path that is WIDE…(the way of the world).
            GOD promised eternal life…
            satan promises eternal damnation…
            Now, we get to choose which one will be our leader. Who will have our allegiance…Will it be GOD or satan. Our choice as we have a free will don’t we? Choose wisely!

          • NGN

            he’s not bashing xtians you moron

      • wandakate

        By that time there will be a bloody civil war…

      • http://www.180movie.com John Wesley

        A private citizen agreeing to pray for a cop is not sharia law you freedom hateing hypocrite.

    • Reason2012

      They’re simply doing exactly what God says they’d do.

      “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.”
      John 15:18-19

    • wandakate

      You so far have 10 up votes so 10 AMENS TO THAT!!! They (this group) CANNOT stop these people from praying…It’s can’t be done. NOBODY is able to stop our prayers. We’re able to pray for whomever, morning, noon, and night if necessary. Just because the department does what they have requested DOES NOT mean that the local people will STOP their prayers. Those officers and the men and woman of that town/department have family, friends, neighbors and even strangers that will gladly pray for their safety and there is no other answer to prayer other than through JESUS, who is our advocate and our mediator to the FATHER GOD.
      SO, give it up, forget it, it won’t be done. They are wasting a lot of time and not nearly get the results that they want. They are seeking “CONTROL” of the masses of people and it’s NOT GOING TO WORK.
      TOO many Christians out here that will NOT stop praying to the one and ONLY GOD of heaven and earth.
      They don’t realize that if He takes away their breath, it’s over for them. They think apparently that they are in control and they are not. Only GOD is ultimately in CONTROL, and He gives us the breath of life when we are born, and HE alone takes it away when we die, so GLORY be to the name of the LORD. Is anybody here with me????? The TRUTH is vital. JESUS said, “IF you’re not with me, you’re against me”. “Deny me, and I will deny you before my FATHER which is in heaven”.

  • David Woelke

    How about organizing an adopt-a-politician prayer club?

  • Angel Jabbins

    No tolerance for anyone but the Intolerant, the Offended, the ‘Micro Aggressed’, the Triggered. Soon we will be living in George Orwell’s 1984…thought police will monitor our every word, thought and action and freedom will be just a dim memory. What a wonderful world that will be for the atheists..their goal achieved. But….uh,oh, this might all come back to bite them in the butt because their thoughts, actions and words will be policed too. Guess they aren’t very forward thinking are they?…like Orwell was. When you can limit someone else’s freedom, the freedoms of all the people are at risk

  • MamaBear

    I do not know if the Tennessee Adopt-a-Cop is being done the same way as in my community, but we are given badge numbers to pray for, not the names of individual policemen. There is zero involvement by the police department except to furnish churches with a list of badge numbers of policemen who want prayers for themselves and their families.
    If FFRF thinks praying for policemen who put their lives on the line is unconstitutional, they have a very odd and extreme interpretation of the first amendment.
    A few years ago, a policeman died in the line of duty who was a member of my church. We have other law officers and retired law officers as members who say that our local policemen are grateful for the prayers.

    • paulvalery

      Who accumulates this list? Who distributes it? How is it distributed?
      If you can say that not one tax dollar is spent on any of this, that volunteers gather the names and badge numbers, pay for the distribution themselves, and no costs whatsoever are passed along to the general public, then I don’t see how anybody could have an issue with this. But, I’d be willing to wager that there is a “community” officer of some sort that is charged with making the list, and that it is sent out of government email servers or with tax paid postage. One officer spending one minute on this, is one less officer, that we ALL pay for, on the street doing what they are paid to do. If that’s the case, then there is a problem.
      And how many lawsuits were filed against your church for prayer for the fallen officer??? None? Because it didn’t cost the entire populace. See the difference? It’s pretty straightforward.

  • acontraryview

    This seems pretty ridiculous to me.

  • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

    Christians should not be praying for police officers…unless you are praying that they leave you alone that you may serve the LORD. Police are not a biblical concept and are not government leaders.

    I pray that the police never come break down my door and steal my children from me for homeschooling and teaching them the Bible…like is happening to other Christians; I pray they stay away from me and don’t falsely accuse me…like is happening to other Christians. I pray they don’t shoot my mother who lives in a bad part of town. I pray they stay away from me and my family, and I pray the ones that do steal children from their parents have their families destroyed by some government agency.

    • Reason2012

      Higher powers that have authority are most certainly a Biblical concept, along with praying for them.

      “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.”
      Romans 13:1-5

      “I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.”
      1 Timothy 2:1-2

      • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

        Before you quote Romans 13, remember the phrase “HIGHER POWERS”. The Police are not a higher power. For example…if the police show up at your door and say “I order you to go clean my car” do you have to obey? No. Why not? Because the police are not our rulers….they are paid enforcement troops. The U.S. Constitution is the highest power in the United States.

        The Bible however, which is perfect, never mandates or suggests having a police force. Instead, in the Old Testament law, the citizens themselves arrest people and take them to the elders and judges.

        • Reason2012

          Anything that has authority over you in life is a “higher power”. Boss, government, police (which are created by the government), tax collectors, parents, you name it

          If you break a law, citizens are not the ones that show up at your door to arrest you: police are. They are the paid enforcement troops of the GOVERNMENT. And he “beareth not the sword (gun, now) in vain”. Does the government bear a sword to execute judgment? Do citizens? No, police does.

          Of course police are not going to show up at your door and say clean your car – and neither would tax collectors or the government or a writer of the constitution, or a courtroom judge, so your example is completely irrelevant.

          And the US Constitution is a higher power than your parents, but that doesn’t mean we now ignore and dishonest parents, ignore and dishonor bosses, ignore and dishonor police, which is where you err.

          You seem to have outright disdain for police. I would be careful it doesn’t fool you to disobey the commandment of God to be subject to ALL the higher powers in our lives and to pray for them and ALL that are in authority. IN spite of your disdain, even if you were to suffer wrongfully, we are to take it, as God says, as it honors Him. Easier said than done, but again it’s the difference between a born again believer in God and unsaved people who hate those who have authority over them.

          “For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.”
          1 Peter 2:19-20

          • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

            Jesus refused to answer Pilate when being questioned by him. (John 19:9-11) Jesus also acknowledged that Pilate had authority over him humanly speaking. If Romans 13 meant you had to obey EVERYONE in authority, and in the human sense Pilate was in authority, then Jesus would have sinned. However, the Bible does not teach you that you have to obey every commmand of everyone in authority. Authority always has limitations.

            For instance, the US Constitution is not a higher power than your parents while you live at home, because the US Constitution has no autority inside of a home. Here’s proof:

            Psa_127:3 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.

            Children are from THE LORD, not the government. The government’s authority is outlined in Romans 13…they’re job is to “punish evildoers”. They do not have any authority over what you do inside of your house, unless you are murdering someone there or committing some crime.

            Romans 13 says every soul must be subject to the higher powers. This requires you to know who the higher power is. And while the police might not tell you to clean their car, they may tell you they are going to search your car without a warrant, which is against the law. The cops are not a law unto themselves. They also might come to your door and tell you to bow down and worship an image of the antichrist. Then what will you do?

            This is the kind of tyranny our founding fathers fled from, and all over America CHRISTIANS of all people are supproting tyranny using Romans 13 as a pretext.

            Read:

            Acts 22:24-28 The chief captain commanded him to be brought into the castle, and bade that he should be examined by scourging; that he might know wherefore they cried so against him.
            25 And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?
            26 When the centurion heard that, he went and told the chief captain, saying, Take heed what thou doest: for this man is a Roman.
            27 Then the chief captain came, and said unto him, Tell me, art thou a Roman? He said, Yea.
            28 And the chief captain answered, With a great sum obtained I this freedom. And Paul said, But I was free born.

            This is the same person who wrote Romans 13 asserting his civil rights to the “authorities”. You have to differentiate between righteous authority, and authority out of bounds.

            And I do have disdain for those who violate the laws of God and persecute my brothers and sisters. You apparently haven’t read the stories of homeschooling parents having their children kidnapped by the government. Or Christians being told they can’t preach against Sodomy. Or Christians being arrested or harassed for preaching the gospel. I am supposed to pray for those who persecute me….but I don’t see where I am supposed to pray for those who persecute my brothers and sisters.

          • Reason2012

            // Jesus refused to answer Pilate when being questioned by him. (John 19:9-11) //

            He was being questioned and fulfilling scripture by not responding in that specific scenario.

            “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.”
            Isaiah 53:7

            // Jesus also acknowledged that Pilate had authority over him humanly speaking. //

            Bingo: that Pilate can put Jesus to death because he has authority over Him and ALL authority is granted by God, which is why we obey ALL authority. Jesus even puts wicked authority over men to exercise His judgment upon us – for us to shy away from this judgment and rebel against this authority is sin on our part.

            Rather than judging ALL police as evil for the deeds of a few, consider that you’re perhaps taking it too far – and also remember this when you need them to put their life on the line to save yours.

            // but I don’t see where I am supposed to pray for those who persecute my brothers and sisters. //

            Recall:

            “[Jesus said] But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
            For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

            Matthew 5:44-48

            “[Jesus said] But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also. Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
            And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.
            And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same. And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.”

            Luke 6:27-36

            Take care.

          • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

            You totally skipped everything I said and took a couple of things I said out of context and quoted irrelevant scriptures.

            The point is that Pilate’s power was not absolute. Just as our own civil government’s power has certain limitations….the limitations set forth in the Bible. For example, and as I mentioned, the government has no authority to tell you how to run your home or raise your kids. Pilate had no authority to make Jesus answer against himself. In this country, we call it the fifth amendment.

            The problem is that Christians are taking Romans 13 completely out of context and allowing their civil liberties to be usurped. The Apostle Paul asserted his rights under the law when necessary.

            And you also quoted a scripture that told me something I just told you. I told you “I know I am supposed to pray for those who persecute me”, and yet you quoted Matthew 5:44-48 and underlined the part that said exactly what I just said I knew. What you didn’t show me is where I am supposed to pray for those who PERSECUTE OTHER CHRISTIANS. Show me THAT VERSE, and I will retract my statement that no Christian should be praying for police.

            By the way…between this and my last message, the wonderful police gave my 76 year old Uncle a TICKET after his car got T-boned and totalled. Yet when I called them because my property got stolen, they said “sorry, nothing we can do.” They show up at Christian’s houses at 4:am, and take their children by force for homeschooling them and teaching them the Bible. And these are the people I am supposed to be praying for? I think not. The Bible never mandates or suggests a police force in the perfect law of liberty. The hireling careth not for the sheep (John 10:13)…and police are the hirelings. The are hired and paid to enforce laws, yet they do not care when my property gets stolen. What keeps theives from stealing more is not that police are around, it’s the 2nd amendment. Which is also biblical. (Luke 22:36)

          • Reason2012

            So you honestly think God only told us to pray for those who persecute just you personally, but do NOT pray for them when they persecute OTHER Christians?

            Think about it:
            So if your friend “Bob” gets persecuted by police, then he should pray for the police, but the rest of us should have disdain towards police and make sure we do NOT pray for them?

            But then when “Julie” gets persecuted by police, “Bob” should now NOT pray for the police, but now “Julie” needs to pray for them instead, when she just got done NOT praying for them when they persecuted “Bob”?

            You seriously believe that nonsense? If you do, you’re not interested in what God says on the matter.

            “I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for ALL men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;”
            1 Timothy 2:1-3

            Where does your Bible says “but don’t pray for ANYONE that persecutes other Christians” – in this day and age, that means pray for almost no one but your brothers and sisters in Christ. It’s God you’ll have to convince of that one,

            – that He didn’t mean to pray for ALL men
            – that He didn’t mean to pray for ALL that are in positions of authority.

            I’ve pointed out all I can – the choice is yours. Please think again. Praying for people God can give them a change of heart – be thankful people prayed for those who used to persecute Christians but are now saved.
            Take care.

          • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

            Take careful notice of what the passage says the PURPOSE of those prayers are…”that we may lead quiet and paeceable lives in all godliness and honesty.” If you go back to my original post, notice that I said that is EXACTLY what I am praying for. I pray the police leave my family alone, that they don’t steal my children from me (like CPS in California just did to a mother for the horrible crime of letting her child play outside), and that they stay away from me.

            The police are not a king nor are they in authority. Therefore, we have no business treating them as such, or lifting them up. And yes there is a big difference between someone persecuting me, personally, or someone persecuting Christians in general. Te someone persecuting me personally is doing evil unto me, and I am not repay evil for evil. Would you pray for Adolf Hitler or Mao Tse Tung?

            If YOU think we should pray for people that persecute Christians, I wonder what exactly you think we should be praying. For God to bless and protect them? The god of this world is Satan (2 Cor. 4:4), and he is the one running things is Washington, D.C. I don’t pray for these people except to the extent I pray for them to leave me alone and not usurp their authority–which is not absolute.

          • Reason2012

            Again, so if your friend “Bob” gets persecuted by police, then he should pray for the police, but the rest of us should have disdain towards police and make sure we do NOT pray for them – perhaps pray they die and go to_hell?

            But then when “Julie” gets persecuted by police, “Bob” should now NOT pray for the police, but now “Julie” needs to pray for them instead, when she just got done NOT praying for them when they persecuted “Bob”?

            Do you seriously believe that?!

            And what do you pray for, you ask?

            That God opens their eyes to see and ears to hear and saves them!
            That He gives them peace in their heart towards Christians, towards others. And that’s what we’d pray for Hitler.

            What would you pray? Would it be “God, I hope you send them to_hell”?

            See your prayers are somewhat selfish: ‘Leave ME alone’ “stop persecuting ME/US’ Start caring for others and the possibility that God can save anyone and pray that God does so.

            What was Daniel’s heart towards Nebuchadnezzar, who killed his brethren and destroyed his nation?

            “They spake and said to the king Nebuchadnezzar, O king, live for ever.”
            Daniel 3:9

            Not, “I pray you leave me alone, don’t steal my children, stay away from me, I will not lift you up, I have disdain for you, you’re unsaved jerks, I hope you burn in_hell” and so on.

            Do you not want others saved? Or are they vermin in your eyes since they’ve “wronged” you beyond measure, and you’re judge and jury and God has no business saving them either?

            “Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?”
            Romans 2:4

            Pray for everyone that God saves them.

            Pray for those you meet that God saves them.

            Pray for those who persecute Christians that God saves them.

            Pray for your enemies that God saves them.

            So you’ve been wronged. So brothers and sisters in Christ have been wronged. Are we supposed to forgive them? YES. GOD will judge. GOD will “deal” with them. And God will deal with us according to our mercy, or lack thereof.

            “Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?

            Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

            Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt.

            But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt.

            So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.

            So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.”
            Matthew 18:21-35

          • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

            .You tell me what we should pray for evil doers. Here is what David prayed:

            Psa 109:8 Let his days be few; and let another take his office.
            Psa 109:9 Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.
            Psa 109:10 Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.

            Rom_11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:

            That’s the Bible. So praying for people doesn’t always mean praying for them as in praying for God to help them.

            Psa_97:10 Ye that love the LORD, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked.

            In 1 Timothy 2, he comes right out and says what the goal of our prayer is… that we may live peaceable lives. Why?

            See this is where my gripe REALLY is. Churches all over America worship cops and the military but have ZERO soul winning. They are busy holding up the people that are oppressing Christians and suppressing liberty, but never go knock on a single door and preach the gospel. And it makes me sick. Jesus commanded us to go soul winning.

            Mar_16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

            GO into the world…and the apostles understood what that meant.

            Act_5:42 And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.

            America is going to hell, and Christians are busy with nonsense that God never commanded. God never commanded for churches to adopt police officers and pray for them. But he DID command soul winning. And hey, maybe that church actually is a soul winning church. If so, PRAISE GOD. But I’d bet my next paycheck if I were a gambling man that it’s not. Why? Because 99% of churches do NO soul winning at all.

            So while cops are out NOT pursuing thieves, and not protecting us from criminals, and on the other hand overstepping their realm of authority by meddling in people’s home lives and with people’s families, you pray that God will save them. I’m praying that they stay away from me and my kids so I can live a peaceable and honest life, as it says in 1 Timothy 2. And I also pray that God will use me and my children to actually see more people saved through soul winning.

            And if they do start persecuting me, then yes, at that point it’s time to start praying for them. Because at that point I’ll know them personally and actually have an opportunity to preach the gospel to them. But I’d rather do it at their front door and live a quiet and peaceable life.

          • Reason2012

            // You tell me what we should pray for evil doers. //

            I already told you and you completely and utterly ignored it and ask the question again as if I didn’t answer it, which proves you have no intention of being honest here, so I take my leave.

            The verses cited above are untouched by you and rebuke your OT attempt to promote anti-police hatred among Christians. I would think again as it’s God you’ll have to answer to for doing such things and teaching such things.

            Take care.

          • http://biblicalsalvation.info/ railhead

            I actually answered the verses you quoted and wrote. Re-read the answer because I quoted several scriptures in it. Not that I disagree with any of them, but I disagree with how most Christians seem to interpret some of them. You have left many of my statements and scriptures I have quoted unanswered, as well.

            You also added to my statements things I never said and made a straw man argument, calling them a made up doctrine. I never said you HAD to personally know someone to pray for them.

            Before you disregard the OT, remember that ALL scripture is given by God and profitable for doctrine. (2 Tim. 3:16) Your average dispensationalist preacher may disagree with that verse, but that’s what the BIBLE actually says.

            I know you think God is against me on this, however I can show you in the Bible where God has WRATH with people who love those that hate the Lord, and that help the ungodly:

            2Chronicles 19:2 And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD.

            You tell me…is it a godly activity to be hired to enforce the law, then basically tell a victim “tough luck” when their property gets stolen? Is it godly to steal someone’s children from them, when God is the one who gave them the children? Is it godly to go to someone else’s home and meddle in their marital disputes? I’m not making this stuff up….this stuff happens on a daily basis in America.

            Therefore, why should Christians pray for them to be protected and helped? You quoted 1 Tim. 2 to me, I say “amen”, I’ll pray that they leave me and my family alone so we can live peaceable lives (something I have been doing for years, actually)….and maybe we can actually get them saved when we show up at their door with the Bible, and preach the gospel to them. What about Romans 13? Nowhere did I say that we shouldn’t submit to them unless a HIGHER POWER disagrees. For instance, the Constitution, or the Bible (the HIGHEST POWER). What I’m opposed to is church sponsored support of this godless state, while the Great Comission goes unanswered. And if you’re honest, you know that church probably doen’t go out door to door preaching Jesus Christ.

            And telling me to “take care” doesn’t negate all the antipathy, by the way.

  • John Albano

    I don’t get it. If they don’t believe in God and don’t believe prayer helps, how does this affect anything? In what manner is this offensive to them or disrespectful to them? The more I read about the things atheists are bothered by, the more I get the feeling that it isn’t that they don’t believe in God, it’s that they are scared to death of Him.

  • Becky

    Do these FFRF fools think that our law enforcement doesn’t have the right to pray? The PDs have chaplains and they’re there to offer prayers for and with POs.

    The constitution does not say, or even intimate, that government employees/authorities/officials/etc cannot freely exercise their religious rights in the workplace.

  • http://www.180movie.com John Wesley

    Bunch of freedom hating hypocritical scumbags who hate the first amendment. FFRF are Hypocrites.