Posted on

82% of Voters Say Religious Liberty Important


the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, Voters overwhelmingly believe religious freedom is important, and a majority are against requiring faith-based institutions to hire those who don’t share their beliefs.

Continue reading 82% of Voters Say Religious Liberty Important

Posted on

United States Supreme Court Hands Down Religious Rights Victory for New Jersey Priest and Rabbi

olmc scaled

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Washington DC,  the United States Supreme Court handed down what attorneys from the Thomas More Society are calling “a huge victory for religious freedom.” The case, pitting a New Jersey Catholic priest and Orthodox Jewish rabbi against Governor Philip Murphy’s COVID-19-related executive orders restricting houses of worship to 25% of capacity while secular businesses and schools are at 100% capacity.

Continue reading United States Supreme Court Hands Down Religious Rights Victory for New Jersey Priest and Rabbi

Posted on

Department of Justice ,“there is no pandemic exception to the Constitution and its Bill of Rights.”

Stock Photo of the Consitution of the United States and Feather Quill

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

The Department of Justice today filed a Statement of Interest in a Virginia federal court concerning the First Amendment’s freedom of religion in support of Lighthouse Fellowship Church (Lighthouse), a congregation in Chincoteague Island, Virginia, that serves, among others, recovering drug addicts and former prostitutes.

The Statement of Interest is part of Attorney General William P. Barr’s April 27, 2020 Initiative directing Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Eric Dreiband, and the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, Matthew Schneider, to review state and local policies to ensure that civil liberties are protected during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Continue reading Department of Justice ,“there is no pandemic exception to the Constitution and its Bill of Rights.”

Posted on

Reader says “Christians are generally more pleasant “

1779238 10152004023698300 2067613236 n1

“First, learn to spell. Perhaps some prayer would help.
Second, one only need to look at how the present joke of a presidential administration got into power to see that “christians” are fundamentally anti-atheist. They are willing to over look perhaps the most un-christian person characteristics solely to advance their agenda. An agenda which goes against the tide of history.
I look forward to the day that religion is but a story we tell our children of a far more ignorant age.”

There you go again. More angry, hateful rhetoric. You are just making my point.
This type of mean spirited, pious, snarky attack reinforces my point that most people, regardless of their belief in God would rather spend time with those who believe in God, since they are generally more pleasant.

Continue reading Reader says “Christians are generally more pleasant “
Posted on

Political Leaders Join Muslims To Discuss True Islam


Oldest annual Muslim conference draws public officials to confront extremism

July 29,2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Harrisburg PA, Martin O’Malley, former Governor of Maryland and U.S. Presidential Candidate, is one of many political leaders who will be speaking at the longest running annual Muslim convention in America. Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA, the nation’s largest and oldest Muslim organization, is hosting its 68th annual Jalsa Salana (Annual Convention) from July 29 to 31 in Harrisburg, PA. Speakers include representatives of the White House, the U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom, country Ambassadors, as well as other political, religious, academic and interfaith leaders from around the nation.

This convention seeks to unite leaders and American Muslims in fighting against extremist ideologies and radicalization for a safer nation and world.  With the official designated theme “True Islam: A Campaign Against Extremism,” speakers will discuss how to combat the growing scourge of  violent extremism and the problem of Islamophobia in the wake of rising violence towards American Muslims.

“Extremism and Islamophobia are very real and concerning issues, not only for the Muslim community but for all Americans,” said Dr. Nasim Rehmatullah, Senior Vice President of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA. “If we want to achieve common peace, we must come together as leaders and American citizens to root out intolerant thinking and behaviors.”

Guest speakers include:

  • Martin O’Malley, Former Governor of Maryland and U.S. Presidential Candidate
  • Ambassador Jackie Wolcott, Commissioner, US Commission on International Religious Freedom
  • Brian Levin, Professor and Director of Center for Study of Hate and Extremism, California State University San Bernardino
  • Nick Miccarelli, Member, Pennsylvania House of Representatives
  • Zaki Barzinji, Associate Director of Public Engagement, The White House
  • Dr. Milton Boniuk, Founder, Boniuk Institute for Religious Tolerance, Rice University —  receiving the 2016 Ahmadiyya Muslim Humanitarian Award
  • Dr. Craig Considine, Lecturer, Sociology, Rice University
  • His Excellency Bockari Kortu Stevens, Ambassador of Sierra Leone to the United States
  • His Excellency Tiena Coulibaly, Ambassador of Mali to the United States
  • Sergio Celis, Member of Congress, Republic of Guatemala
  • Carlo Sanchez, Member, Maryland House of Delegates
  • Carol Bianchi, Mayor of Bernards Township, New Jersey
  • George Halcovage, Schuylkill County Commissioner, Pennsylvania
  • Rev. Mark Tonnesen, St. Andrew’s Lutheran Church, Florida
  • Rev. Harold Eugene Thompson, Miami Beach Community Church, Florida

With special messages from:

  • U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL)
  • U.S. Senator Jeanne Sheehan (D-NH)
  • U.S. Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA)
  • Tom Wolf, Governor of Pennsylvania
  • Charlie Baker, Governor of Massachusetts
  • Eric Papenfuse, Mayor of Harrisburg
  • Other federal and state lawmakers

When:  Guest session: July 30th, 2016, 4pm – 6pm

Where:  Pennsylvania Farm Show Complex & Expo Center, 2300 N Cameron St, Harrisburg, PA 17110

Media Opportunity: Interviews with above guests and with American Muslim leadership.

More Information:

About Ahmadiyya Muslim Community:

The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is a dynamic, reformist and fast-growing international movement within Islam. Founded in 1889, the Community spans over 200 countries with membership exceeding tens of millions. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA, established in 1920, is among the first American-Muslim organizations.

The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is the only Islamic organization to believe that the long- awaited messiah has come in the person of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) of Qadian, India. Ahmad claimed to be the metaphorical second coming of Jesus of Nazareth and the divine guide, whose advent was foretold by the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad. The Community believes that God sent Ahmad, like Jesus, to end religious wars, condemn bloodshed and reinstitute morality, justice and peace. Ahmad’s advent has brought about an unprecedented era of Islamic revival and moderation. He divested Muslims of fanatical beliefs and practices by vigorously championing Islam’s true and essential teachings.

Posted on

N.J. Rep. Scott Garrett: I have no malice toward gays


By Jonathan D. Salant | NJ Advance Media for
on January 16, 2016 at 8:05 AM, updated January 16, 2016 at 10:17 AM

WASHINGTON — Under fire for reportedly refusing to contribute to a Republican group because it backed gay candidates, U.S. Rep. Scott Garrett said his opposition to same-sex marriage comes from his faith, and he does not “have malice” toward any group of people.

“My colleagues and my constituents know that I am a devout man of faith, and therefore I support traditional marriage,” Garrett said in a statement released by his campaign late Friday. “Calling me names or implying that I have malice in my heart for any person or group of people is false and completely disingenuous.”

Garrett (R-5th Dist.) has faced sharp criticism for reportedly telling fellow Republican members of the House Financial Services Committee that he was not contributing to the House GOP’s fundraising arm because it backed gay candidates. Garrett has never denied the reports. His statement was the first lengthy response since the controversy erupted last summer.

He and U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (R-4th Dist.) are among 154 House Republicans — a majority of the conference — who are sponsoring legislation to allow groups and individuals to cite their religious beliefs and deny service to same-sex couples.

U.S. Rep. Scott Garrett’s reported remarks on gays has Democrats looking at winning the congressional district.

“Like all Americans who exercise their right of free speech and religion, I make contributions to people and organizations who share my beliefs on important issues, in this case traditional marriage,” Garrett said. “Since then, I’ve continued my support of the Republican Party and the ideals we represent on behalf of our country and every American.”

Garrett called the criticism an effort by the “Washington establishment” to “distract from my work to revive the economy and hold the government accountable by portraying me as something I’m not.”

He said that several prominent Democrats, President Barack Obama, former President Bill Clinton and former U.S. Secretary of State Hiilary Clinton, also initially opposed same-sex marriage.

Was Obama “a bigot before he changed his view on traditional marriage in 2012 when it was politically convenient?” Garrett said. “Or Hillary Clinton? Or President Bill Clinton?”

Posted on

Whatever Happened to Religious Freedom?

church sky 1

By Roger Pilon

This article appeared in The Wall Street Journal on July 14, 2015.

With nationwide same-sex marriage now in its pocket, the gay-rights movement is turning quickly to the next item on its agenda: outlawing discrimination based on sexual orientation. That is where many libertarians who strongly supported same-sex marriage step back for a more measured approach. It is one thing to prevent government officials from discriminating against same-sex couples — that is what equal protection is all about — quite another to force private individuals and organizations into associations they find offensive.

The law here is unsettled, especially as the constitutional right to the free exercise of religion is pitted against various statutory rights to be free from discrimination. The Supreme Court muddied those waters in its same-sex marriage decision last month. Writing for the majority in Obergefell v. Hodges, Justice Anthony Kennedy merely mentioned in passing that religious adherents would continue to be free to “advocate” and “teach” their beliefs. Conspicuously absent, as dissenting justices noted, was any mention of the “exercise” of those beliefs.

Meanwhile, conflicts are increasing as the LGBT community presses its agenda. As Americans prepared to celebrate the Fourth of July, Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian ordered bakery owners Aaron andMelissa Klein to pay a lesbian couple $135,000 for “emotional damages” because the Kleins, citing their religious beliefs, had declined to bake a cake for the couple’s wedding.

The week before, Cynthia and Robert Gifford, a Christian couple in upstate New York who own a small farm open to the public for seasonal activities, filed an appeal with the state Supreme Court. They were fined $13,000 last year by the New York State Division of Human Rights for declining to host a same-sex wedding. The Giffords were also ordered to implement “antidiscrimination training and procedures” for their staff — re-education, in effect.

How did we get to this point? Freedom of association — the simple idea that people are free to associate, or not, as they wish — certainly isn’t what it once was.

“When cake bakers and others are fined for adhering to their beliefs about same-sex marriage, a new kind of discrimination is upon us.”

We’ve never had that freedom in its purest form, but the main restraints were once limited and reasonable. Under common law, if you held a monopoly or were a common carrier like a stage line or railroad, you had to serve all comers. If you represented your business, an inn for instance, as “open to the public,” you had to honor that, though you didn’t have to serve unruly customers and could negotiate what services you offered.

These rules left ample room for freedom of association more broadly, albeit with serious exceptions like Jim Crow, the deplorable state-sanctioned discrimination enforced by the heavy hand of government.

Forced association of the kind at issue with the Kleins and Giffords is a product mainly of the civil-rights movement of the 1960s. Believing, probably correctly, that the only way to break institutional racism in the South was to prohibit public and private discrimination, Congress passed civil-rights laws that forbid discrimination in wide areas of life on several grounds — such as race, religion, sex or national origin. States have also passed such laws, including those that in many jurisdictions now prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

But uncertainty arose concerning the relation between those laws, plus others, and religious liberty. Could a state withhold unemployment benefits from a Native American who used peyote — an illegal drug — for religious purposes? Hoping to resolve such questions, a nearly unanimous Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993. Twenty-two states have since passed similar laws, but the issue remains vexed. Witness the Supreme Court’s decision a year ago upholding Hobby Lobby’s challenge to ObamaCare’s contraceptive mandate, and the uproar over Indiana’s religious freedom restoration act a few months ago.

The question at hand, then, is whether and how modern antidiscrimination laws limit the constitutional and statutory right to the free exercise of religion. Even after Obergefell, there are clear cases — on statutory, to say nothing of constitutional grounds — in which religious liberty will trump antidiscrimination claims. Clergy opposed to same-sex marriage surely will not be forced to perform or open their facilities to such ceremonies, although some in the LGBT movement are already pressing for churches to lose their tax-exempt status if they do not.

The public-accommodation cases are closer calls. Because they represent their businesses as open to the public, the Kleins and Giffords shouldn’t be able to deny entrance and normal service to gay customers — and neither has done so. If a same-sex couple had walked into that bakery hand-in-hand and ordered bagels, they would have been served without objection. But it is a step further — and an important one — to force religious business owners to participate in a same-sex wedding, to force them to engage in the creative act of planning the event, baking a special-order cake for it, photographing it, and so on.

No one enjoys the sting of discrimination or rejection. But neither does anyone like to be forced into uncomfortable situations, especially those that offend deeply held religious beliefs. In the end, who here is forcing whom? A society that cannot tolerate differing views — and respect the live-and-let-live principle — will not long be free.

Posted on

Media moves to squelch free speech in attacks on Scott Garrett

scott garret 018

July 27,2015
the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, Rep Scott Garrett  finds him self in the cross hairs of a over hyped media attack based on unsubstantiated rumor and innuendo.
We have seen this one to many times were the main stream media template trumps the facts  and continues to report a false story because it better fits their news template .

The anti Garret charge has once again been led by weak inside the beltway GOP members and the Bergen Record . Who’s publisher Stephen Borg, came to Ridgewood for a “civility forum ” in February and told the crowd , ” the whole problem is that since people have found their voice through social media they have come to so many different opinions civil discourse has fallen .Things were so much better when North Jersey Media had a monopoly on public discussion and could always dictate terms .  Borg implied that elites like himself we the only ones qualified to make those decisions. Borg pointed out how this blog and its anonymous posters are the greatest enemy to not only American Democracy  but to the dominance of North Jersey Media Group. While I was rather flattered that the Publisher and President, North Jersey Media Group thought this blog shook the very foundations of civil discourse  and was viewed as the barbarians at the gate , I would suggest the far larger problem might be the totally bias, and slip shot reporting  of his Media Empire. Borg set the tone for the evening which came down silencing critics and reasserting true elitist “we know better  than you ” , so time to be quite .”

The whole thing started when Garrett refused to pay his NRCC dues because of a feud with Speaker Bohner,  but has been morphed into according to unsubstantiated sources Garrett didn’t support the NRCC because  “it actively recruited gay candidates and supported homosexuals in primaries,” .

By the way many in the GOP do not support the NRCC including this blog because despite a landslide win the GOP has failed to deliver  on a single issue and has instead conspired to help the “Obama agenda”.

The Jersey media has run with this tripe of coarse without any effort to substantiate facts .The GOP elites in DC have been joined by the usual suspects like “Blue Jersey ” who have hired a “rent-a-mob to protest at Garrets office in Glen Rock today at 1230  at 266 Harristown Rd.

There have been at lest 20 hit pieces to date citing these unsubstantiated comments reporting them as fact , like the Mike Brown ,hands up fake controversy the facts will eventually get in the way of this witch hunt , but until then expect to hear more garbage from New Jersey media sources and more blame falling on the “mean and uncooperative anonymous bloggers” while the media has a free had to quote anonymous sources .

Jennings Column: Few Republicans Publicly Criticizing Garrett for Gay Remarks

The openly gay chair of the Passaic Republicans is putting pressure on other party leaders to denounce Rep. Scott Garrett’s alleged objections to gay candidates. John Traier said he initially gave Garrett the benefit of the doubt, but Garrett did not return his message: (Jennings/The New Jersey Herald)

Jackson: How far will GOP press Garrett?

JULY 26, 2015, 11:16 PM    LAST UPDATED: SUNDAY, JULY 26, 2015, 11:20 PM

Rep. Scott Garrett’s decision to stop supporting a key Republican campaign fund did more than raise questions about his attitudes toward gay people — it highlighted an often-obscured reality about the political machinery that ties congressional power to cash.

Party leaders — for both Democrats and Republicans — know that certain committee assignments give members of Congress access to lucrative streams of contributions from industries that those committees oversee.

Posted on

Emmanuel Baptist to Welcome New Pastor


Emmanuel Baptist Church is delighted to invite you to an installation service for their new pastor, Rev. Dr. Kenneth Gill on Sunday June 7 at 3:30pm at the church. Refreshments will follow.

Emmanuel Baptist is located at 14 Hope St., Ridgewood, NJ. Please RSVP to the church office at 201-444-7300 or by May 20, 2015.

14 Hope St, Ridgewood, NJ 07450
(201) 444-1333

Posted on

Cruz: Democrats, big business teaming up to stifle religious freedom


May 02, 2015, 01:26 pm
By Bernie Becker

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said Saturday that the culture wars show off the cozy relationship between Democrats and corporate America.

Speaking in South Carolina, Cruz bemoaned the “perfect storm of the Democratic Party and big business coming together,” according to Bloomberg.

The Texas Republican was specifically referencing the recent fight over Indiana’s law on religious freedom. But Cruz noted that there’d been similar spats in Houston and elsewhere in the U.S., and insisted conservatives needed to gear up for the battle to defeat gay marriage.

“Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you,” Cruz said.

Posted on

Can gay marriage and religious freedom co-exist?


photo by ArtChick Photography

Kevin Boyd, Rare Contributor

Posted on April 27, 2015 12:46 pm

On Friday, an administrative law judge in Oregon recommended a $135,000 fine for the bakery company Sweet Cakes by Melissa.

The owners, Aaron and Melissa Klein, refused to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple. They are Christians who do not believe in same-sex marriage.

The lesbian couple claimed they had justification for “damages” against the Kleins:

In their lawsuit, the two women claimed they felt “mentally raped,” as part of a list of 88 symptoms of emotional distress they experienced at being refused a cake.

The long list of symptoms included “acute loss of confidence,” “doubt,” “excessive sleep,” “felt mentally raped, dirty and shameful,” “high blood pressure,” “impaired digestion,” “loss of appetite,” “migraine headaches,” “pale and sick at home after work,” “resumption of smoking habit,” “shock,” “stunned,” “surprise,” “uncertainty,” “weight gain” and “worry.”

This comes in the wake of controversies over religious freedom legislation in Indiana and Arkansas. A more narrow measure that deals exclusively with marriage is under consideration in Louisiana. In all three states, gay rights groups strongly oppose these laws.

The question has to be asked: At this point can gay marriage co-exist with religious freedom?

More and more conservatives are coming out for gay marriage. The Supreme Court will likely rule in favor of same-sex marriage in all 50 states this summer. Polls show that an increasing majority of Americans favor same-sex marriage. The battle is all but over nationwide.

The real test for those who support freedom is whether they uphold it for people who are unpopular, such as opponents of same-sex marriage. In a free society, there should be protections for mom and pop wedding service providers who cannot in good conscience service same-sex weddings. Those businesses are an extension of their owners, who should not be asked to check their beliefs at the door.

Many orthodox Christian sects, among other religions, continue to view same-sex marriage as sacrilege. What right does the state have to force these people to think differently?


Posted on

Pope, on anniversary, says believes he will have short pontificate



Pope, on anniversary, says believes he will have short pontificate
Reuters – Fri, 13 Mar, 2015

VATICAN CITY – Pope Francis said in an interview published on Friday he believes his pontificate will be short and that he would be ready to resign like his predecessor rather than ruling for life.

In the long interview with Mexican broadcaster Televisa, released on the second anniversary of his surprise election, Francis also said he “did not mind” being pope but would like to be able to go out in Rome unrecognized for a pizza.

“I have the feeling that my pontificate will be brief – four or five years, even two or three. Two have already passed. It’s a somewhat strange sensation,” he said, according to a Vatican translation from Spanish.

“I feel that the Lord has placed me here for a short time,” the Argentine-born pontiff said.

Francis, apparently in good health at 78, said “I share the idea of what Benedict did.” In 2013, former Pope Benedict became the first head of the Roman Catholic Church in 600 years to resign instead of ruling until he died.

“In general, I think what Benedict so courageously did was to open the door to the popes emeritus. Benedict should not be considered an exception, but an institution,” Francis said.

However, he said he did not like the idea of an automatic retirement age for popes, such as at age 80.

Posted on

Another Illustration That Tolerance Does Not Extend to Faithful Catholics



Another Illustration That Tolerance Does Not Extend to Faithful Catholics

By: Msgr. Charles Pope

In another show of selective tolerance from the cultural radicals, there comes the following story, as related in Crisis Magazine. Here are some excerpts from the article:

In their zeal to protect students from any comments or opinions that may hurt their feelings, many professors [in this case at Marquette University] have created “safe spaces” in their classrooms—controlling all conversations in an effort to ensure that no one is ever offended …[Professor Cheryl Abbate]  made it clear that the classroom was not a [place for students doubting] the value of same-sex “marriage.” Such conversations had to be held in secret so as not to offend others … One student in the class decided to pursue this issue with Abbate after class … The student said: “I have to be completely honest with you, I don’t agree with gay marriage …”  Professor Abbate replied: “Ok, there are some opinions that are not appropriate, that are harmful.”

When the student replied: “If I choose to challenge this, it’s my right as an American citizen,” Abbate responded: “Well, actually you don’t have a right in this class … to make homophobic comments, racist comments, sexist comments … I can tell you right now, in this class homophobic comments, racist comments and sexist comments will not be tolerated. If you don’t like that you are more than free to drop this class.”

In the “safe space” Abbate has created, homosexual students have the right not to be offended … But, where does that leave faithful Catholic students? Is there a safe space for them? … For Abbate, it is uncontroversial to have a safe-space policy that is only safe for those who agree with her about the value of same-sex “marriage.”

In December, Marquette relieved Professor John McAdams of his teaching and other faculty duties for blogging about the Abbate incident. According to McAdams, the student involved in the confrontation with Abbate talked with him about the incident, and McAdams took to his blog, Marquette Warrior,  [N.B. Professor Abbate] had also written of the incident on her blog but was not disciplined for bringing the matter to light … [The full article is here: Crisis Magazine online: Catholicism is Considered Unsafe at Marquette]

Welcome to “tolerance” as defined by secular radicals. In their lexicon, “tolerance” is “your right, actually, your obligation to agree with me.” “Live and let live” means, “you have the right to live only where Isay and under the terms I set.” “Bigotry” applies only those speaking out against the classes they say are oppressed. “Phobes” (as in homophobes) are those who oppose their  agenda. “Hate” only exists against the classes they say are “protected” and that they have defined as “oppressed.” Apparently, it is not possible for religious or social conservatives to be the object of hate, since hate only comes from social conservatives. Or so it would seem from their behavior and policies. And very few will question them on this  due to the support of secular media and to the pressure to be politically correct.

Pope Benedict spoke frequently of the “tyranny of relativism.” Essentially, this means that when a culture decides there is no fundamental basis of truth (whether from Scripture or Natural Law), the result is that there is no real basis for discussion or resolution of issues. Thus, who “wins the day” is based not on reason but on who shouts the loudest and/or who has the most power, money, or political influence

Posted on

Religious Freedom Meeting–Tuesday Feb 3, at 7:30 K of C Oakland



Religious Freedom Meeting–Tuesday Feb 3, at 7:30 K of C Oakland

Tonight Tuesday, February 3, we will be having our monthly meeting.

There are several very good videos I have found on the subject of the suppression of religious speech and rights on college campuses put out by an organization called FIRE (Freedom for individual Rights in Education. They are hard-hitting, and so we’ll show them. If anybody can find any others, we can see them too.

As we discussed last meeting, we have sent out letters introducing ourselves to the other Protestant churches in Oakland. Now we are awaiting a response.

Hope to see everybody then. And bring a friend.

Knights of Columbus
7 Court House Place, Oakland, NJ 07436
(201) 337-7539


Don't wait to WOW her! Save 25% when you select early delivery for your Valentine's Day orders at Use Promo Code: DLVRCUPID at checkout. (Offer Ends 02/12/2015)show?id=mjvuF8ceKoQ&bids=216823

wine.comshow?id=mjvuF8ceKoQ&bids=209195 14 dyas free

Posted on

Knights of Columbus Oakland hosts a Religious Freedom Discussion


Religious Freedom Meeting Tuesday Jan 6 Knights of Columbus Oakland

Happy New Year to all. I hope everyone had a great Christmas and will have a Happy New Year this Thursday.

The K of C Hall has been reserved so we can have our monthly Religious freedom meeting this Tuesday night, January 6, at 7:30. While the country has been immersed in the Christmas season, a lot of things have been happening regarding religious freedom. Among them are the following:

1. Unreasonable restrictions placed on Christian chaplains at the VA.

2. Unjust punishment meted out to an Army Lieutenant Colonel for running afoul of the Administration’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy.

3. Foreign students legally admitted to the US to attend a religious training school now told they may be deported.

4. An Army Chaplain punished for mentioning his faith in a lecture to troops on handling depression.

5. A Catholic University (Marquette university) suspended a professor for defending a student’s right to state the Church’s position on homosexuality.

6. A recent GAO report that Obamacare is subsidizing abortions, contrary to  Obama’s promise made to the contrary.

7. Information that Muslims are exempted from Obamacare because insurance violates Muslim doctrine.

8 Movie Faith Freedom Foundation (Christian/Muslim Issues)

While everyone has been absorbed in the holidays, militant secularism never takes a break. These and other things will be discussed at our meeting. If you know of any other incidents or examples come share them with us.

Well, I hope to see everyone on Tuesday night.

Have a happy and safe New Year
Joe Kuhns

Knights of Columbus Oakland
7 Court House Place, Oakland, NJ 07436
(201) 337-7539