Monday, August 11, 2008


I was standing in church yesterday singing along in Worship to the song, “How great is our God,” and it hit me like a ton of bricks. Just how long will we be able to sing such a song? I also thought of the song ‘Our God is an awesome God, he reigns from heaven above, with wisdom power and love, our God is an awesome God.” My fear is that pretty soon, such songs will be banned. You see, in this secular humanitarian multiculturist world we live in, these songs are bigoted. They discriminate on the basis of religion. They claim that one particular God is somehow better than other gods. Moreover, they claim the mere existence of a God. And soon, the Politically Correct Police (“PCP”) will ban their use as a “hate crime.”

You see, it won’t be too long before some Muslim, atheist, or secular humanist claims that these songs are discriminatory, violate their rights to believe in a different god, or no god at all, and are in fact, “hate speech.” Remember, these songs claim that one God is somehow “better than” all the other gods. To the PCP this is blatant discrimination and they won’t stand for it until it is completely eradicated from society. The PCP have already eradicated this type of speech from all of our public schools, from all of our public squares, from all of our graduation ceremonies and before sporting events, and from all of our courthouses. What’s next? Will the members of an Evangelical Free Church be forbidden from claiming how great is their God? Don’t laugh. For the secular humanists are on the march and we Christians have been asleep at the wheel for far, far too long.

But churches are private entities, right? Therefore, the government can’t regulate their speech or their form of worship, right? Maybe, maybe not. I could see some aggressive secular humanist claim that because the Church uses public utilities and public roads, and receives tax breaks from the government (preferential treatment) they can be regulated. Remember, the Supreme Court recently ruled that taking private land from one landowner and giving it to another private land owner was for a “public purpose” because it would increase the tax revenue for the municipality. If the S.Ct. can make that giant leap, why not control worship that some find to be offensive and discriminatory? They will argue that it is not a violation of the free exercise of religion clause, but rather is striking a balance between the free exercise clause and the right to be free from discriminatory language. (A giant, giant leap, I know, but what if?)

So what can we do? Keep singing, of course. But also, we need to make sure that the next president appoints conservative Judges and Justices who will look to the framer’s of the Constitution’s original intent. Rather than judges who seek to make new law by judicial dictate from the bench. Therefore, as much as I find John McCain to be far too liberal for my tastes, he is by far the better option than anything the democrats have to offer. So as they say in Chicago, “Vote early and vote often.” Our children’s and their children’s future ability to freely worship may depend upon it. We are in a war, a cultural war, and we are losing. Onward Christian Soldier, marching off to War! (That would be banned too -- way too violent and clearly hate speech, etc. etc.)

1 comment: