The Patriot Post® · In Georgia, a Helping of Preach Pry
Not too long ago, liberals argued that Christians couldn’t bring their beliefs to work. Now, it seems you can’t even bring them to church! That’s a lesson Georgia state officials are apparently trying to teach Dr. Eric Walsh — but it is state leaders who need some schooling!
The lay pastor from California had just accepted a job running the state’s Department of Public Health (DPH) in 2014 when his new office called and asked for copies of the sermons he’d delivered over the weekends at his church. The next day, to everyone’s astonishment, Walsh was fired. Of course, Georgia’s DPH insists it had nothing to do with his biblical beliefs, but as our friends at First Liberty Institute know, that’s nothing but a vain attempt to cover its tracks for what should be an open-and-shut case of religious discrimination. Thanks to First Liberty, Dr. Walsh didn’t shrink back and take the discrimination from Governor Nathan Deal’s (R) administration, he filed a lawsuit against the State of Georgia.
Since then, the legal battle has taken some interesting twists — most recently, when the state demanded copies of Dr. Walsh’s sermons, sermon notes, and even his Bible! Sound familiar? It should. This is exactly the totalitarian tactic that Texas Mayor Annise Parker took toward the “Houston Five,” a group of ethnically diverse pastors who’d been preaching against the transgender bathroom ordinance she forced on the city. Desperate to silence her chorus of critics, she subpoenaed 17 forms of communication from area pastors as a tool of intimidation, despite the fact that these five pastors were never part of the lawsuit! In the end, her outrageous sermon-grab only succeeded at one thing: galvanizing the community and sending her personally motivated gender confusion law down the tubes.
Apparently, leaders in Georgia didn’t learn anything from Parker’s downfall and seem intent on starting their own holy war over religious liberty. “Please produce a copy of your sermon notes and/or transcripts,” Attorney General Samuel Olens wrote to attorneys representing Dr. Walsh. He refused, explaining, “No government has the right to require a pastor to turn over his sermons. I cannot and will not give up my sermons unless I am forced to do so.” [Yesterday], at a press conference at the Georgia State Capitol, First Liberty, Pastor Dave Welch of the Houston Five and FRC’s own Travis Weber stood with Dr. Walsh and called on Georgia leaders to withdraw their demand. “The state insists that it did not fire Dr. Walsh over his religious beliefs or sermons. If that’s true, why is it demanding copies of his sermons now?” argued attorney Jeremy Dys. “It’s clear the government fired Dr. Walsh over his religious beliefs, which is blatant religious discrimination.” In an interview with Fox News’s Todd Starnes, Dys went on to warn, “If the government is allowed to fire someone over what he said in his sermons, they can come after any of us for our beliefs on anything.”
Like far too many people, the government not only scrutinized Dr. Walsh for his Christian beliefs but used those beliefs against him! That’s not only unconstitutional, it’s un-American! And it should not be tolerated! “This action against Dr. Walsh is another unjust assault on people of faith, including the pulpit itself,” Travis told reporters. “We support Dr. Walsh in his resistance and call upon the Georgia government to act according to the law and traditions of our country, which respect people of faith and the autonomy of the church.”
Of course, the sad irony in all of this is that Georgia had an opportunity to pass a Religious Freedom Restoration Act to stop the government from punishing men and women of faith. Extremists sank the bill, with the help of Governor Deal, who refused to lift a finger to protect religious expression. Now, Governor Deal has an opportunity to make some amends — by using his authority to correct the state’s overreach into church affairs like Dr. Walsh’s. Join us in calling on him to end the targeting of the pulpit by signing our petition here!
Originally published here.
Libs Arm Russell over NDAA
With a nuclear Iran on the horizon and the rest of the world on edge, is the president really willing to risk national security to advance his own agenda? All signs point to yes. In a staggering move, the White House announced this week that it’s willing to send the bill that funds our military down in flames because it dares to protect religious liberty. The decision, which was leaked to Congressional Quarterly by staff who would only speak on the condition of anonymity, is a head-shaker, considering how agreeable Rep. Steve Russell’s (R-Okla.) amendment should be.
What’s so controversial about the First Amendment? Plenty in this administration, where the very sound of the phrase “religious liberty” triggers an apoplectic response in liberals everywhere. In May, Democrats booed, screamed and even chanted “shame!” — all because the House decided to protect the fundamental freedom to believe. Thousands of faith-based organizations and family owned businesses contract with the Department of Defense to offer vital services to both members of the military and others. All Congress has done is step in to stop the intolerance toward faith-based organizations that provide vital service that would not be available otherwise.
It all started in 2014 when the president issued an executive order insisting that the government couldn’t partner with businesses or organizations for projects over $10,000 if they engaging in supposed “anti-LGBT discrimination against employees.” Of course, under the administration’s backwards understanding of “discrimination,” that could mean anything from a statement of faith to setting certainly hiring policies or even dress codes! All Rep. Russell’s amendment would do is allow the Defense Department to continue contracting with “any religious corporation, religious association, religious educational institution or religious society” for services without the organization having to jettison their religious beliefs. Yet that — a simple restatement of the First Amendment — is enough to put the brakes on the entire troop bill.
Right now, the bill is in its final negotiations between both chambers, which hope to keep the streak alive of passing the NDAA on time every year for the last five decades. President Obama is doing all he can to jeopardize the record, even sending White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough to lobby members on the issue. Even Senate Democrats are threatening to block a floor vote on the language if the Russell Amendment isn’t stripped. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who’s leading the anti-freedom charge, sent a letter to leaders of the Armed Services Committee in both chambers arguing that “Our government should have no part in funding discrimination.” I agree! Let’s stop the discrimination against Christians! Contact Armed Services Chairmen Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), 202-224-3871, and Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas), 202-225-4151, and tell them to hold the line on religious liberty. A vote against the Russell Amendment is a vote against the First Amendment!
Originally published here.
To Server and Protect
Only 22 percent of Americans have a “great deal of trust” in the Executive Branch. And after President Obama’s latest lies, it’s easy to see why! In an explosive set of emails released by the WikiLeaks hack, the country is learning that Barack Obama did not, as he insisted in March of 2015, find out about Hillary Clinton’s private email servers “at the same time everybody else learned it through news reports.” Not only did he know about the illegal set-up, he communicated with her on it! And he must have known it was wrong, or else he wouldn’t have used an alias to do so!
Clinton’s former chief of staff at the State Department, Cheryl Mills, was so panicked about the arrangement, we read in the exposed emails, that she tried to get staff to scrub the messages. “We need to clean this up — he has emails from her — they do not say State.gov.” Even more incriminating, Clinton advisor Huma Abedin exclaimed to FBI investigators about the exchanges, “How is this not classified?” Now, caught in a huge lie — which, unfortunately, is familiar territory for this administration — it’s obvious that the Obama White House was trying to protect Clinton and broke the law to do it. Suddenly, the FBI’s decision to drop the prosecution makes sense. Andrew McCarthy, writing for National Review, shakes his head with the rest of America.
“For the parties to prove such culpable conduct on the president’s part in a high-profile criminal trial would have been profoundly embarrassing to him, to say the least. Therefore, it was never going to happen… Given that Obama was manifestly determined to conceal his e-mails with Clinton, what is the chance that he would ever have permitted a prosecution of Clinton, which would necessarily have exposed those e-mails? To repeat what I’ve been arguing, I’d rate it as something less than non-existent.”
Of course, this only confirms what people have long suspected about President Obama: that he’s a liar. “The president so routinely appeals to ignorance when asked about damaging news involving his administration that it’s become a cliché,” the New York Post fumes. “Obama claimed he was caught unawares by the scandals involving gun-walking into Mexico, the NSA’s spying on foreign leaders, Gen. David Petraeus’ leak of sensitive information to the woman with whom he was having an affair, the IRS scandal, the Veterans Affairs scandal and the Justice Department’s monitoring of journalists, among others.”
After eight years of suspicion, we now have clear evidence that this president has intentionally deceived the American people. It all begs the question: What else has he lied to us about? And, just as importantly, how low will his preferred successor stoop to hide the truth?
Originally published here.
This is a publication of the Family Research Council. Mr. Perkins is president of FRC.