religionfags stahp
The constitution is a threat because it was founded on the ideals of individual freedom, part of that principle includes a secular state, with freedom of religion. The US may have a largely christian heritage, but it is not a christian nation, and until the religionfags understand that they will continue to be a drag on the movement for they would replace one tyranny with another in the form of theocracy.
Fuck you, but let me REEExplain.
First, not trying to be divfag. If the thing we are protecting, per our oaths,(those of us who have taken one to the constitution that is) is freedom of religion, which means a secular state, I think it's worth fucking goddamn pointing out that the xtianfags are closer to the American Taliban than you'd like to fucking acknowledge. Be careful who you make your bed with, I have seen the christians handywork of blood over the centuries, and they are not blameless in allowing the current state of affairs in the first place, so sit the fuck down. All religions are tools of control of (((them)))
KEK, yall see what I mean?
Moving on…
CFR main cabal pivot point, primarily by DoS influence via the Machiavellian/Straussian Kissinger worshiping diplomats there.
Focus on CFR and Chatham house connections to CIA and et al. Trump has executive branch housecleaning to do.
Think about andreno and where we learned about it.
Yall need to pay attention to the images.
We are meaning the same thing. I acknowledge the need for the grand architect diest view to prop up my dedication to natural rights, which is the core principle of America.
I agree with you, it means free to practice whatever religion you choose, but ALSO that there shouldn't be a religion of the state. The founders, especially the core founder, Madison, wrote deeply about this subject and to write it off so flippantly shows you aren't intellectually serious about the matter.
Don't diefy Mattis. He'd be the first to tell you not to. He's good at what he does, and that's being a general. We still need proper civilian leadership in the high executive.
Saturnalia is probably one of the roots of the cult. Jordan Maxwell is relevant here, as long as you take into account his biases. I prefer just listening to talks from whatever archeaologist is doing the oldest dig.
Many indications that the oldest cults were black sun, morning star, saturn, or moon worshipers, and almost all had human sacrifice. The pheonician/canannites were one such division.
Jefferson and the Bill of Rights
Main articles: Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause
Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the United States, whose letter to the Danbury Baptists Association is often quoted in debates regarding the separation of church and state.
In English, the exact term is an offshoot of the phrase, "wall of separation between church and state", as written in Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.[20]
Jefferson was describing to the Baptists that the United States Bill of Rights prevents the establishment of a national church, and in so doing they did not have to fear government interference in their right to expressions of religious conscience. The Bill of Rights was one of the earliest examples in the world of complete religious freedom (adopted in 1791, only preceded by the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in 1789).[original research?][citation needed]
The concept of separating church and state is often credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke (1632–1704).[13] According to his principle of the social contract, Locke argued that the government lacked authority in the realm of individual conscience, as this was something rational people could not cede to the government for it or others to control. For Locke, this created a natural right in the liberty of conscience, which he argued must therefore remain protected from any government authority. These views on religious tolerance and the importance of individual conscience, along with his social contract, became particularly influential in the American colonies and the drafting of the United States Constitution.[14]
At the same period of the 17th century, Pierre Bayle and some fideists were forerunners of the separation of Church and State, maintaining that faith was independent of reason.[15][16] During the 18th century, the ideas of Locke and Bayle, in particular the separation of Church and State, became more common, promoted by the philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment. Montesquieu already wrote in 1721 about religious tolerance and a degree of separation between religion and government.[17] Voltaire defended some level of separation but ultimately subordinated the Church to the needs of the State[18] while Denis Diderot, for instance, was a partisan of a strict separation of Church and State, saying "the distance between the throne and the altar can never be too great"