A Personal Message that Needs YOUR Reply

President Obama’s Administration is forcing faith based medical institutions to provide abortion and birth control to women even though abortion and/or birth control may directly contradict the tenets of faith. This is a classic example of how Christianity is prevented from influencing government but government specifically in an unconstitutional manner is making a law affecting religion.

The Manhattan Declaration is a coalition of Christians (Catholics, Protestants and Eastern Orthodox) that stands for First Amendment Religious Liberty according to constitutional Original Intent and is embarking to battle this government intrusion into the Christian religion.

JRH 7/8/12

*****************************

A Personal Message that Needs YOUR Reply

Take Action to Defend Religious Liberty

By Chuck Colson, Robert George and Timothy George

Sent: February 7, 2012 3:00 PM

Manhattan Declaration

Dear Manhattan Declaration Signer,

We have arrived at the crisis point we knew would come. Our religious liberties are in the greatest peril and we need you to act immediately and sign this petition.  

Our federal government, charged under the Constitution not only to respect, but to protect and defend, our most fundamental freedoms, has now imposed upon people of all faiths a mandate that their institutions provide insurance to their employees to pay for abortion inducing drugs, surgical sterilizations, and contraceptives. There is, for all intents and purposes, no recognition of the rights of conscience for those Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, or other faith-based employers to be free of this imposition.

The Catholic Church, as the largest provider of faith-based education, health care, and social services for the poor, is on the front lines of the struggle, but because of the required abortion drug coverage and the violation of religious freedom at the heart of the mandate, it is a struggle that implicates all believers. If the mandate is rammed down the throats of Catholics, no people of faith will be safe.

The Catholic bishops of the United States, dozens of whom are signers of the Manhattan Declaration, have made clear that they cannot and will not bend to the mandate. If forced to choose between the law of Christ and the edict of Caesar, they have no doubt about which master they will serve. If necessary, they are prepared to close institutions, and even go to jail, rather than comply with a human dictate in violation of what they believe, in conscience, to be the will of God.

All of us pledged such fidelity in the Manhattan Declaration. We saw this day coming, though few of us realized it would come so soon. Now we face the test: Will we, as we promised to do, “ungrudgingly give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, but under no circumstances give to Caesar what belongs to God”?

For our part, we renew our pledge to each other and to each of you. We ask you to do the same. Let us not scatter in fear or yield our precious spiritual and constitutional rights. Let us stand with the Catholic bishops and with those of every faith who will stand with us in the defense of religious liberty and the rights of conscience.

We ask you to do two things:

1.   First, we posted on the Manhattan Declaration website a petition to President Obama prepared by the Becket Fund, which we’re asking everyone to sign. Please let your friends know about this petition. Get 10 others to come to the ManhattanDeclaration.org website to sign it, and at the same time ask them to sign the Manhattan Declaration itself if they haven’t already. Please encourage all of your friends, family, and colleagues to sign it today! Those who would deny our liberties need to know millions of Christians are standing together to oppose them.

2.   Second, we are also raising funds to hire a full-time helper with the Manhattan Declaration enterprise. The list of Manhattan Declaration signers could now double, and there will be significant grass roots activity that we want to encourage.  Up until now, three of the sponsoring ministries have provided funding and part-time staff support. To get the job done we must have a separate staff dedicated to the work of the Manhattan Declaration movement. We haven’t had staff enough to answer all the correspondence let alone do some events. 

If you can make a donation to help with this, please do so, but not at the expense of your church or other Christian organizations. We are asking you to contribute only if you can make an extra, sacrificial gift above and beyond your regular donations. Only twice have we asked the Manhattan Declaration signers to make a gift and you responded.  However, if there is a moment for sacrifice, the moment is now.

Like no other time in recent American history we must stand together no matter the consequences. May God use our strong alliance to prevent this outrageous attack on our most fundamental civil liberty.

VIDEO: Chuck Colson on Religious Freedom and Possible Necessity of Civil Disobedience

Sincerely,

Chuck Colson

Robert George

Timothy George

____________________________

The Manhattan Declaration is a non-partisan statement of conscience in defense of human life, traditional marriage and religious freedom.

About Manhattan Declaration

Beware of Leadership Promoting Immorality

John R. Houk

© February 26, 2011

Attention Social Conservatives that stand for Biblical and Family values! The Obama Administration WILL NOT enforce the Defense of Marriage Act. This means that President Barack Hussein Obama has instructed Attorney General Eric Holder to look the other way as homosexual reprobates impose their immorality on America furthering another ungodly indictment against the American government.

Something to think about my fellow Americans: When the ancient Northern Kingdom of Israel and later the Kingdom of Judah in the South began imposing immorality on Israelis at the behest of their kings (i.e. the ruling authorities), God sent heathens (Assyria and Babylon respectively) to remove their place in the Promised Land. Leftists and Secular Humanists are infecting the American government with policies that have made homosexuality and similar ungodly perversions legal with the imprint of normalcy. That is an evil place to be.

Below is an email from Chuck Colson that is addressed to signers of the Manhattan Project which is about the immorality of BHO. Below the email is an alert posted at The Chuck Colson Center by Alan Sears who is the President of the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF).

JRH 2/26/11

***************************

Pres. Obama will not defend long-standing marriage law

By Chuck Colson

Sent: February 25, 2011 3:08:47 PM

Sent from: Manhattan Project

To all Manhattan Declaration signers:

The decision by Attorney General Holder not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act raises very grave questions.

 
Justifying his position, he says that in the congressional debate there were "numerous expressions reflecting moral disapproval of gays and lesbians and their intimate family relationships."  He went on to describe this as "animus" (defined by Webster as vehement enmity, hatred, ill will)-violating the Equal Protection Clause.

"Animus" to defend a moral position based on 2,000 years of classical and Christian teaching rooted in reason and scripture?

Holder has embraced the position of Federal Judge Vaughn Walker in California that opposing so-called gay marriage can be "harmful to gays and lesbians."  But this is like claiming that opposition to polygamy is harmful to polygamists or that laws defining marriage as the union of two people harm those who prefer to live in what are called sexual "triads" or "quadrads."  Our historic marriage laws harm nobody--they serve husbands, wives, children, and the common good of society.

 
If the expression of our deepest convictions is treated as animus, our religious liberty is in peril.  We cannot fail to speak the truth even if it is labeled hate speech.

 
This is exactly why we wrote the Manhattan Declaration, pledging that we would under no circumstances render to Caesar what belongs to God.

 
Though the circumstances are not comparable, the issue is the same one Dietrich Bonhoeffer faced.  Bonhoeffer's example is well known.  But another compelling illustration is Martin Niemoller.  Timothy George has given a brilliant, brief meditation on Niemoller, who had the courage to defy Hitler to his face.  We strongly urge that you view this by CLICKING HERE or the video box below.  It is an extremely powerful story--and sad to say, increasingly timely.

 
The ACLU has already hailed Holder's decision as "the tipping point in the gay rights movement."   Sadly, that may well be the case unless we speak out loudly and quickly.

 
Please forward this email to your friends asking them to sign the Manhattan Declaration.  It's never been more important that we take a strong and united stand.

Chuck Colson, The Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview

Dr. Robert George, Princeton University

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccA7_3vCuAw

 

The Manhattan Declaration is a non-partisan statement of conscience in defense of human life, traditional marriage and religious freedom. Visit us at ManhattanDeclaration.org

___________________________

It's Time To Fight - Alliance Defense Fund speaks out on USDOJ refusal to protect law.

By Alan Sears, President ADF

February 24, 2011 5:43 PM

The Chuck Colson Center

Alliance Defense Fund Update on federal DOMA Litigation

It’s time to fight…

We wanted to update you on the litigation involving the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA – which essentially is the law that defines marriage to include one man and one woman for federal government purposes, and allows each state to define marriage without imposing any re-definition on another), and especially the impact of Eric Holder’s unprecedented announcement yesterday that the Department of Justice will no longer defend the law (and in fact actively oppose it).

As you know, the Attorney General’s announcement only confirms what has been a reality since the Administration began “defending” DOMA in the seven jurisdictions in which it is currently being challenged. It’s no exaggeration to say that the President’s team has been throwing the cases. The Administration has expressly waived advancing winning legal arguments and intentionally failed to cite binding legal precedent in each case. In fact, the Administration has “expressly disavowed” the winning legal arguments that the Bush Administration had made in previous cases. In short, it is clear that the President and his lawyers have been actively sabotaging DOMA in court.

That is why we have put so many resources into DOMA’s defense. There are two cases in California, two cases in Massachusetts, and cases in Oklahoma, Connecticut, and New York. The cases from Massachusetts are currently at the First Circuit Court of Appeals. ADF and its allies filed amicus briefs in those cases, which resulted in 15 briefs being filed in the case that covered every single legal argument that the United States Department of Justice had abandoned. The Alliance Defense Fund filed a brief on behalf of Representative Lamar Smith, who is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, presenting the court with the winning arguments that have been recognized by every other case upholding the definition of marriage. We also represent the state defendant in the Oklahoma case to defend both Oklahoma’s constitutional amendment defining marriage and DOMA. The other DOMA cases are in their beginning stages where we are preparing the same defense of DOMA that we mounted in the First Circuit Court of Appeals.

We are also advising members of Congress on their right to intervene in light of Department of Justice’s complete abdication of its duty to defend the law enacted overwhelmingly by both Houses of Congress. The good news is that the Attorney General’s announcement paves the way for the House of Representatives intervention so that the federal law can be vigorously defended by an official party. We are encouraging Congress to step forward to fill the void left by the Administration and we are offering to help any way we can.

It’s an outrage that the President and his Attorney General would not only fail to defend the law, but actively side with those who seek to redefine marriage and label the majority of Americans as the equivalent of bigots motivated by “animus” for believing marriage is the union of one man and one woman. (After all, not only have 30 state marriage amendments been passed by usually overwhelming margins across the country, DOMA was passed in the House of Representatives by a bi-partisan vote of 342-67, and in the Senate 85-14 and signed into law by then President Bill Clinton). But this Administration has made no secret about what it thinks when religious liberty collides with those who seek to redefine marriage. As the President’s pick as head of the EEOC said, “…we should similarly not tolerate private beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity that adversely affect LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] people,” “it’s a zero-sum game.”

The Alliance Defense Fund Marriage Team has kept the threat to marriage and religious freedom at the forefront of our minds as we have been working around the clock to litigate these cases. We ask for much prayer, for Congress to act, and the Courts to follow the law and Constitution. It is time to fight…

Thank you VERY much. John 15:5

Yours for religious freedom in America, with sincere appreciation and best regards,

Alan E. Sears
President, CEO and General Counsel
ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND

_____________________________

Beware of Leadership Promoting Immorality

John R. Houk

© February 26, 2011

___________________________

About Manhattan Project

About The Chuck Colson Center

Free Worship or Free Religion

John R. Houk
© July 2, 2010

Chuck Colson was listening to a Hillary Clinton Secretary of State speech. Hillary used a phrase in that speech that caught Colson’s attention: “Freedom of Worship.”

Colson believes the phrase is Orwellian “Newspeak” by obfuscating the word “Worship”. As Colson points out there is a vast difference between freedom of Worship and Freedom of Religion. The first is to keep your religious beliefs private and the later is to freely practice your faith openly including sharing or espousing the high principles of your faith without worry of retribution.

If one is forced to keep their religious thoughts/beliefs to themselves, one cannot say something affirming morality or disdaining publicly atheism or someone else’s anti-religion opinion. The concept of Freedom of Worship is the European concept of Freedom. This is to say one has Freedom of Speech as long as it does not offend someone. The example of European Freedom is the plight of Geert Wilders who is facing prosecution for hate-speech. His offense was speaking the truth about Islam. European Leftists have thrown people in jail for openly sharing their faith with Muslims or homosexuals. People have been prosecuted in Europe for saying homosexuality is a sin.

This is the path of Freedom of Worship instead if Freedom of Religion. Chuck says it better than I. Chuck has about a four minute he calls the Two Minute Warning in which he articulates this much better than I.

JRH 7/2/10
***************************
Chuck Colson Email Elert
From Manhattan Declaration
Sent: July 2, 2010 9:32:55 AM

This is an urgent alert.


You need to know about what may be one of the gravest, most insidious threats to religious freedom I've seen in my lifetime: What may be an attempt, at the very highest levels of government, to RE-DEFINE the very meaning of religious freedom, from "free exercise" to merely private worship.


If what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a speech at Georgetown University reflects a new direction in government policy, then mark my words, our religious liberties are in peril.

Please, click on the link below to see my "Two Minute Warning" video commentary at the Manhattan Declaration website to see exactly what I'm talking about.


Study carefully the play on words; words matter.


I urge you: Watch this video, share it with friends. Blog about it. Write a letter to the editor of your newspaper - point out what is going on. It's time to expose this outrageous and dangerous assault on religious freedom.


We cannot be asleep at our posts while we still have the freedom to speak out.


Chuck Colson

++++++++++++++++++++++++

From the “Watch this video” link


Two-Minute Warning
Freedom of Worship: an anorexic description of our rights

By Chuck Colson
Published Date: June 30, 2010
Colson Center

Chuck Colson is sounding the alarm: The government—at the highest levels—may be attempting to redefine the very meaning of religious freedom. If what Secretary of State Hilary Clinton said in a recent speech reflects a new direction in government policy, it seems the aim is clear: To kick faith out of the public square, to send Christians into the closet.



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
'Freedom of Worship' Worries: New religious freedom rhetoric within the Obama administration draws concern.

By Sarah Eekhoff Zylstra
July 02, 2010
Manhattan Declaration
Originally posted: Christianity Today

"Freedom of worship" has recently replaced the phrase "freedom of religion" in public pronouncements from the Obama administration. Experts are concerned that the new rhetoric may signal a policy change.

"Freedom of worship" first appeared in President Obama's November remarks at the memorial service for the victims of the Fort Hood shooting. Days later, he referred to worship rather than religion in speeches in Japan and China.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoed the shift in language. In a December speech at Georgetown University, she used "freedom of worship" three times but "freedom of religion" not at all. While addressing senators in January, she referred to "freedom of worship" four times and "freedom of religion" once when quoting an earlier Obama speech.

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom noted the shift in its 2010 annual report. "This change in phraseology could well be viewed by human rights defenders and officials in other countries as having concrete policy implications," the report said.

Freedom of worship means the right to pray within the confines of a place of worship or to privately believe, said Nina Shea, director of the Center for Religious Freedom and member of the commission. "It excludes the right to raise your children in your faith; the right to have religious literature; the right to meet with co-religionists; the right to raise funds; the right to appoint or elect your religious leaders, and to carry out charitable activities, to evangelize, [and] to have religious education or seminary training."

The State Department does acknowledge that worship is just one component of religion, said spokesperson Andy Laine. "However, the terms 'freedom of religion' and 'freedom of worship' have often been used interchangeably through U.S. history, and policymakers in this administration will sometimes do likewise."

While Obama's administration may simply be using different words to say the same thing, the timing of the change is worrisome, said Thomas Farr, religion professor at Georgetown University. Obama just recently announced an ambassador for international religious freedom (Suzan Johnson Cook), but the position has been demoted within the State Department.

"It puts what otherwise might have been passed off as a rhetorical shift under the spotlight a little more," Farr said.

The softened message is probably meant for the Muslim world, said Carl Esbeck, professor of law at the University of Missouri. Obama, seeking to repair relations fractured by 9/11, is telling Islamic countries that America is not interfering with their internal matters, he said.

As with all diplomatic decisions, the move is a gain and a loss, Esbeck said. Other countries may interpret the change as a sign that America is backing down from championing a robust, expansive view of religious freedom, which if true would be a loss, he said.

But the State Department has traditionally ignored religion's impact on foreign affairs, he said. "The Obama administration seems, at least in part, to get that a large part of successful foreign relations is taking religion into account."

If Obama is telling the State Department to be religiously sensitive, that's a gain, Esbeck said.

Not everyone agrees.

"If [Obama is changing language to signal sensitivity], it is terribly shortsighted and self-defeating," Farr said. "It will not work, and it will simply make the situation more difficult … to engage."

Shea said the danger is greater than a mere backfiring. "I'm very fearful that by building bridges, we're actually stepping away from this fundamental principle of religious freedom. … It is so critical for Western, especially American, leaders to articulate strong defense for religious freedom and explain what that means and how it undergirds our entire civilization."
______________________
Free Worship or Free Religion
John R. Houk
© July 2, 2010
___________________
About Manhattan Declaration

___________________
The Chuck Colson For Christian World View About Page
Copyright © 2010 Colson Center. All Rights Reserved.