Additional Titles

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other
Ryter
Articles:

The Two Kerry's:
War Hero or
Traitor?

"Men in Black" The Cult of The Judges

 

 

ERASING CHRISTIANITY
PART 1 of 3

 

 

 

By Jon Christian Ryter

December 31, 2005

NewsWithViews.com

The contemporary assault on Christianity began with a little-noticed brochure from the American Bar Association [ABA to its members] in May, 1989, advertising a seminar for "...[a]ttorneys who want to be on the leading edge of an explosive new area of law"—suing churches, Christian leaders and Christian activists. The seminar was entitled: "Expanding Use of Tort Law Against Religions." While this would trigger a new phase of attacks on Christianity, in reality, the assault on the Christian Church was launched shortly after the end of World War II with the birth of the United Nations and the reemergence of the globalist movement that lay dormant for two decades. The effort to create world government failed when our 28th president, Thomas Woodrow Wilson, was unable to convince Congress to join the League of Nations and surrender America's sovereignty to a world government headquartered in Brussels.

In 1989 the Utopians realized they were running out of time. The attack against Christians and the outlawing of Christianity as a racist religion was behind schedule. The globalists were running out of time. While the Utopians still don't get it, the clock that is ticking down isn't their clock, it's God's. And His timeline is right on schedule.

The utopians who were attempting to create one-world government at the end of World War I were quick to grasp the reality that the nationalistic fervor that fuels patriotism is rooted in faith—Christian faith. It became very clear to the globalists between the two world wars that, before American sovereignty could be breached the utopians— aided by corrupt political hacks, judges, and bureaucrats—would have to erase Christianity from the hearts, minds and souls of the American people before the United States could be re-shackled to the Old World Order.

The utopians would attack the underpinnings of the 1st Amendment. They knew if they could erode the right of free men to speak on the issues that affected their lives, or prevent those free men from expressing their religious beliefs, they would no longer be free and the globalists who were steering the American ship of state towards the shoals of Utopia would win.

Because the American people struggled so hard against impossible odds to gain their freedom from the overlords of Europe, the Founding Fathers of the United States understood that more than anything it was the patriotic pride of the colonial soldier that buoyed him through a war America should have lost. And it was patriotism that made the United States the greatest nation in the history of the world. If they missed it in 1920, the overlords of Utopia got it in 1946. That year the attitude of the federal courts changed. The restriction placed in the 1st Amendment by the Founding Fathers against their newly formed government—"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."—would be shifted by activist federal judges away from the government and used against the people whose right to worship without restrictions could not be constitutionally abridged by the government or the courts.

In order to begin erasing the generational isolationism that had permeated America since WWI, President Harry S. Truman introduced a UN public school curriculum created by UNESCO into the American school system on April 6, 1946. The curriculum, "Towards World Understanding" was designed to prepare America's next generations for "world citizenship." The following year UNESCO's Director General, Sir Julian Huxley, issued a scholastic directive entitled "Classrooms With Children Under 12-years of Age" which blamed the parents of school children for harming their offspring by instilling in them a sense of Christian faith and patriotic pride. Huxley said that "...[b]efore the child enters school his mind has already been profoundly marked, and often injuriously, by earlier influences...first gained...in the home."

Later in the text—which was used in hundreds of classrooms throughout the nation—Huxley observed that "....it is frequently the family that infects the child with extreme nationalism. The school should therefore use the means described earlier to combat family attitudes." Among those things that "infect" the family, Huxley reiterated again, were religion and patriotism.

Huxley's utopian UN programs were incorporated in the public school system of the United States and eventually became the foundational framework for preschool—getting the children away from their parents before they are unduly influenced by homegrown parental prejudices—God and country. Today, a half-century later, the American family has come to believe that preschool is good for their children and that it's also good for them. They believe that by getting their kids into school earlier, the children learn faster, and learn more. Nothing could be farther from the truth. As was proven by Dr. James Dobson three decades ago, children not only learn faster, but they retained much more of what they learn if they are held out of school until age seven.

The government, through its Congressional incorporation—the National Education Association—is merely exercising the Huxley Principle by encouraging parents to place their children in preschool classes and even curriculurized daycare. Get the children away from their parents and surrender them to the "Village" as soon as possible. No God. No country. No homegrown prejudices to interfere with the New World Order brainwashing. One government. One economy. One religion—the State. Huxley's anti-Christian principles, carefully woven into the public school curriculum through UNESCO launched a generational attack on Christianity not only in the United States, but around the world.

From 1946 until 1965 the battle was waged almost entirely from within the citadels of public education as the American Civil Liberties Union was drafted by the utopians in the American Bar Association to carry the separation of church and state banner in the battle against God in the courtrooms. In 1946, after the State of New Jersey enacted legislation that provided the venue for parochial school children to ride to their Catholic schools on public school buses, a Ewing Township taxpayer, Arch R. Everson sued—based on two previous Supreme Court decisions, Reynolds v. United States [1878] and Pierce v. Society Sisters [1925]—and argued that the school board was supporting a religion. The case was argued before US Supreme Court on Nov. 20, 1946. The decision in Everson v Board of Education came down on Dec. 2, 1947. The school board won. The American people lost.

In Everson, the high court did two things. First the activist New Deal court legislated from the bench by coupling the 1st and 14th Amendments. In doing so, the justices were able to apply the prohibitions that the Founding Fathers applied only against the federal government against the States. Second, it more clearly defined what Reynolds v United States [98 USC 145] viewed as a wall of separation between church and state, creating by definition what has since become known as "the establishment clause."

It's important to stop and examine the inherent ideology of the court that declared war on religion in America. It was a mirror reflection of the very first Supreme Court—philosophically opposite of the views of the high court justices picked by George Washington. The first US Supreme Court contained five justices: John Jay, John Rutledge, William Cushing, Robert Harrison, James Wilson and John Blair. While all of them were Federalists, each understood that the Constitution not only prevented any legislative body in the land from restricting the right of the people to worship, it also prevented any court in the land—the Supreme Court as well—from restricting or abridging that right.

The 1st Amendment was a safeguard designed specifically to prevent the federal government from creating a state-sponsored religion, or from interfering with the rights of the people to worship God as they saw fit when, where, and how, they wanted. The New Deal Court that heard Everson was appointed almost exclusively by Franklin D. Roosevelt. Its justices were largely social activists who had signed on to the Roosevelt agenda. And topping FDR's agenda was converting the League of Nations into the United Nations—and creating world government. Roosevelt, like most of the world's leaders, believed that establishing world government was the only way to prevent war. Believing the adult generations of the world had too many homegrown prejudices to live war-free, the UN concentrated on indoctrinating the children of the world—the next generation of adults—to live together in peace. The agent of change would be UNESCO.

The New Deal Court contained seven justices picked by FDR: Wiley Rutledge, Frank Murphy, Robert Jackson, Felix Frankfurter, Hugo Black, Stanley Reed and William O. Douglas. Each of these justices were appointed specifically because they were utopian liberals who very specifically and very privately agreed to protect FDR's unconstitutional New Deal laws. The remaining two members of the New Deal Court were appointed by Harry S. Truman who, as vice president, ascended to the presidency upon the death of FDR in April, 1945. They were Fred Vinson, appointed as Chief Justice, and Harold Burton. Washington and FDR were the only two presidents who appointed majority opinion courts which virtually rubber-stamped their agendas by guaranteeing they would be upheld if challenged in the federal courts.

The liberal establishment has unilaterally controlled the philosophical slant of the US Supreme Court since 1937. Today there are three conservatives on the high court: Chief Justice John Roberts, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. There are four liberals: John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, David Souter and Stephen Breyer. The swing voters are the two moderates: retiring Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy. If O'Connor is successfully replaced by Samuel Alito, there will be four conservatives and four liberals with one swing vote—making Kennedy the most important vote on the court. If John Paul Stevens died or stepped down before Bush leaves office, and he is able to appoint a conservative to replace him, it would be the first time since the 1936 Hughes Court that conservatives controlled the Supreme Court.

As long as the liberals control the Supreme Court, the attack against Christianity will continue in the United States. If a major philosophical change on the high court does not happen soon, religious liberty will be legislatively abolished and Christianity will be branded as an exclusive, rather than inclusive, racist religion, justifying the "Village" in erasing it from the American society. It was because of the deliberate politicizing of the high court that the virulent attack on Christianity was allowed to happen, and why it is tolerated by the judiciary. For that reason, it is critical that conservatives do not desert the Republican Party in 2008. If they do, and a third party candidate strong enough to pull 5% of the Christian vote away from the GOP enters the race, the Democratic candidate—even if that candidate is Hillary Clinton—will be elected the 44th President of the United States with about 43% of the vote. If that happens, ,the Senate will likely fall back into the hands of the Democrats, and Christianity in America will be doomed. The liberal judiciary in the United States will completely erase the tenets of Christianity from the land by successfully branding it a racist religion, and allowing civil rights groups to sue it out of existence.

Under what is now referred to as The Establishment Clause, Associate Justice Hugo Black wrote "...[t]he establishment of religion clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbelief, for church attendance or nonattendance.

No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the federal government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups or visa versa."

The federal courts need to do more than give lip service to the Establishment Clause before rendering decisions that pertain to it. The judiciary needs to actually contemplate the biased manner in which it was applied in Eklund v Byron Union School District.

Click here for part -----> 2, 3

© 2005 Jon C. Ryter - All Rights Reserved

Order Jon Ryter's book "Whatever Happened to America?"

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale



Jon Christian Ryter is the pseudonym of a former newspaper reporter with the Parkersburg, WV Sentinel. He authored a syndicated newspaper column, Answers From The Bible, from the mid-1970s until 1985. Answers From The Bible was read weekly in many suburban markets in the United States.

Today, Jon is an advertising executive with the Washington Times. His website, www.jonchristianryter.com has helped him establish a network of mid-to senior-level Washington insiders who now provide him with a steady stream of material for use both in his books and in the investigative reports that are found on his website.

E-Mail: BAFFauthor@aol.com


Home

 

 

 

 

 

 

The liberal establishment has unilaterally controlled the philosophical slant of the US Supreme Court since 1937.