Amanda Marcotte: If You Can Say One Thing About Her, It Is...

.......that she is a liar:

Of course, true religious freedom requires a secular society, where government stays out of the religion game and leaves it strictly to individual conscience, a standard that runs directly against the modern conservative insistence that America is and should be a “Christian nation”. So what are people who claim to be patriots standing up for American values to do? Increasingly, the solution on the right is to redefine “religious freedom” so that it means, well, its exact opposite. “Religious freedom” has turned into conservative code for imposing the Christian faith on the non-believers.

Marcotte is not just spreading lies, she is spreading fear and hate in the pursuit of damaging Christianity, by lying about it. The fact is that Atheism/secularism are in full control of the government, and the Atheist/secularist lack of any consistent moral principle other than consequentialism is completely apparent and obvious. It is obvious that the unprincipled desires of the AtheoLeft are being forced onto Christians. (Note 1) To fear the encroachment of principles into the public sphere is fearsome to Marcotte, to the point that she must lie about its impending dangers. Dangers to what? Complete lawlessness of Atheist/secularist/Leftist governing? Is that what Marcotte is defending?

She quotes a "study" from People for the American Way (which, in case you haven't heard of it is Uber-Leftist). That article claims that all persecution of Christian stories are false, that most of them start with Todd Starnes who reports on them at FOX, and that ADF and ACLJ are puppets in drumming up coservative lies. Odd that both ADF and ACLJ win many, many lawsuits against the "nonexistent" AtheoLeftist persecuters, isn't it?

But back Marcotte.

"The most obvious and persistent example of this is the issue of creationism in the classroom. Clearly, teaching creationism in a biology classroom is a straightforward violation of the First Amendment, a direct attempt to use taxpayer money to foist a very specific religious teaching on captive students. "

What she is really saying is that Atheism and Atheist-evolutionism is the Law of the Land, despite the wording of the First Amendment to the contrary (more on that below). She fears intellectual exposure that might demonstrate any fallacy in the AtheoLeftist program for indoctrination (maleducation) of children.

Then she takes on Hobby Lobby, of course, that evil Christian empire that wants to protect itself from government dictation of how to provide benefits to its employees:

"But the Becket Fund’s latest high profile case is an outright attack on religious freedom, in a case that will soon be decided by the Supreme Court. The Becket Fund is defending the Green family that owns Hobby Lobby in their desire to impose their religious beliefs about contraception on employees, by denying employees the right to use their own insurance benefits on contraception. The idea that it could ever be “religious freedom” to tell an employee that her private use of her own compensation package should be constrained by her boss's religious beliefs should be laughable. But that’s the logic of the modern Christian right that holds that the only way to “protect” their own religious belief is to start forcing it on others."

Hobby Lobby is a private firm, of course, and the employees know full well what the benefits are. Until the AtheoLeft decided that they, no one else, just they are the arbiters of what transpires in private companies and their employees. But this is not about employees; the Leftists cannot allow any private entity to be left alone in its quest to own the entire economy, health system, and moral landscape which is formed in their own unprincipled, Atheist image. So the full weight of the government is inveighed to enforce the Atheist demands. The Atheists are in charge, full on. They are not victims, despite their whining and class warfare.

" The solution, increasingly, is to outright argue that non-believers or people of different faiths have beliefs that are simply less worthy of basic protections for religious freedom, much less the hyper-charged “religious freedom” of imposing your faith on others, the kind of “religious freedom” conservative Christians believe they’re entitled to. "

The "religious freedom" or "freedom from religion" involves exactly what she decries: imposing your beliefs [unprincipled Atheism] on others, as Atheists demand that they are entitled to. And by the full force of the US Government. Consider this:

"But even if someone doesn’t have a religion doesn’t mean that they lose their basic right to decide for themselves what to believe. Atheists do not have a religion, but it’s just as wrong to force atheists to pray to your god as it would be to do so to a Muslim. "

But it is not wrong, for Marcotte and the AtheoLeft, to force their own beliefs and demands on Christianity. (You don't see them forcing abortion rights or women's privacy and healthcare rights on Muslim outfits). No, it is Christians they fear. And loathe. And wish to eviscerate, legally. Which is why the ADF and ACLJ and the First Amendment are so important: to keep us from being another Mao's China, or Lenin/Stalin's Russia, or Pol Pot's Cambodia, or Che/Fidel's Cuba.

This Marcotte claim is a lie, outright. No one is forcing Atheists to pray, and that claim is not just false, it is ideologically oriented toward an ideology of falseness, as she continues:

"Sadly, this argument that the Christian right to religious freedom includes the right to foist their faith on others has made the leap to the Supreme Court, with Justice Scalia arguing incoherently that the “ First Amendment explicitly favors religion” in order to justify the hijacking of a school event to force religion on the non-believers in attendance. As Scott Lemieux at Lawyers Guns and Money pointed out, it’s actually the exact opposite: “it disfavors religious endorsements by the state.” But in this new topsy-turvy right-wing world, up is down, left is right, and the only way to protect religious freedom is to use government and corporate force to make everyone follow a conservative version of Christianity, whether they believe it or not. "

By deliberately misreading the First Amendment and certainly its intent, Marcotte herself tries to prejudice the government against religion. Here's the actual amendment in its entirety:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

The Left is blind, completely to the text, which does no more than prohibit Congress (and only Congress) from two actions: (a)establishing an official religion; (b) prohibiting free exercise of religion. That's it. Nothing more. Except that the Atheists want official Atheism as the official, designated religious premise under which the Atheist government would not be restricted by any nasty rules at all. Just like we have right now under Obama.

Marcotte makes Atheists into the Victim Class AND the Messiah Class. What else would we expect? But they are hardly victims; they are Leftist oppressors, just like all previous generations of Leftists. They are principle-free and they want total control.

Note 1. Marcotte hates that some people do not want to contribute to the degeneracy of the hook-up and abort culture. The government enforcement of insurance for degeneracy is NOT a principle being enforced by a moral Left; it is access to degeneracy that is being facilitated by the Left and disguised as a faux moral principle. It is Alinsky's "Principle of Moral Rationalization - "which is indispensable at all times of action or the use of ends and means... All effective actions require the passport of morality". And Alinsky's tenth rule: "the tenth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that you do what you can with what you have and clothe it in moral garments." Thus all Leftist movements are "highly moral". And this from Alinsky: "The essence of Lenin's speeches during this period was 'they have the guns and therefore we are for peace and reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the bullet'". Marcotte's ill concealed religious hatred is closer to the bitter truth than Lenin ever let on. And she is a much more obvious liar.