Romney Loves GOD So We Love MITT! SCREW THE FIRST AMENDMENT! -Part 2

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Audio and Transcript – We have two callers today inquiring about Religion, God, The Pledge of Allegience, and the First Amendment.  These two are so… er, misinformed, shall we say “How misinformed are they?” That we had to split them up into two posts because one post just couldn’t handle it. And let’s not forget that they’re calling in about Mitt Romney’s “I can pledge better than Obama” statement, so the bar was already set pretty low for them.  Check out today’s transcript and audio…

Click here for Part 1!

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript – Part 2:

Mike:  Let me ask you a question, those of you that are questioning me.  Let me ask you a question.  Exactly why do you think the wording of that First Amendment is worded as it is?  Let me ask you another question.  Have you ever read the Virginia statute on religious freedom?  I’m not going to read it to you on the air.  Look it up yourself.  Some of you obviously need to read this.  There is a reason why the First Amendment was demanded and was basically — the first ten amendments do not come out of the first Congress.  Using Article V, the Virginians led by Patrick Henry would have succeeded, I think, in calling another federal convention and they would have undone the Constitution.

The First Amendment is there for what purpose then?  Oh, it’s there so your local school, that’s right, it’s there to ensure that some punk in Alaska can wear a “Bong Hits for Jesus” t-shirt.  No, it’s not!  It is explicitly what it says.  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  That’s the extent of it.  Respecting an establishment basically meant that you will not establish a church, you will not establish a deity, you will not establish a religious order in any way, shape or form, and at the same time, you are prohibited from annihilating or ending any other establishment that was in a state.  This is the “free exercise thereof” part.

The State of Connecticut had a state church at the time.  All the way up until 1786 or so, the State of Virginia, the first state with its own written by its people constitution, basically had an official religion.  The State of Pennsylvania, in its famous constitution of 1776 had a religious test in it, a test.  If you didn’t measure up to their religious standard, you couldn’t even run or hold office.  As I’ve talked about on this program before, Charles Carroll of Carrollton, the Catholic, was not even eligible for office in the State of Maryland because at that time, Catholics were thought of like Muslims are thought of today.  That was ultimately eliminated.

No one is saying that you’re not to be a religious person.  No one is saying that you should throw your fidelity, your devotion to your God or anything overboard.  It is not part — why do we want to make it part of our political life?  We want government out of our freaking lives.  Oh, no, as long as we have holy people in government making life miserable and taxing us to the bejesus belt, that’s okay.  I mean really, seriously.  Somebody has an interesting post on the Twitter feed.  Somebody said, “Mike, you’re not understanding your listeners very well.  There is no life before Obama.  We’re going to change the Gregorian calendar.  It won’t be BC and Anno Domini any longer.  It’s going to be Before Obama Era, BOE, and After Domini Obama, ADO.”

Those of you that are asking questions like this one, “Mike, our founders were men of God.  That was the reason they were for the good of all men.  What is wrong with ‘In God We Trust’?”  I didn’t say there was anything wrong with it.  It doesn’t have a role in a secular form and plan of government.  We could explain this until the proverbial cows come home.  Go to Jefferson’s Monticello, those of you that think highly of Jefferson.  Go read what’s on his obelisk, nothing about any federal office he ever held but that he was the author of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom.  Dixie is in Florida next.  How are you doing, Dixie?

Caller Dixie:  I’m doing great.  I appreciate your conversation this morning, and as you say I’m not going to change anybody’s mind, but you’re incorrect.  You’re driving me crazy again today.  Here’s the thing: it’s not about the God anybody chooses to respect.  It’s not about that.  It’s about believing that there is something bigger than government, that government is not the end all, be all and our savior of everything.  It’s about believing there is something bigger than government.  It’s not respecting anybody’s particular God.  It’s believing that government doesn’t provide everything.  When people don’t have something above government, they look to government as the end solution.  That’s the point.

Mike:  Where did I say that God isn’t bigger than government and that man needs something larger than himself?  Direct my attention to it.

Caller Dixie:  You haven’t particularly said that, but you keep saying that — here’s another thing.  You go on and on about Mitt Romney and you complain about Mitt Romney, but then you say tradition is important, good, honorable men are important.  He’s the best we’re ever going to get as far as a good, honorable, respectful man who honors tradition, etc., etc.  I like that he has something more important to him than government.  Why are we attacking that?

Mike:  Is that what you heard him say, that there’s something more important to him than government?  So God in government is important to him?

Caller Dixie:  He didn’t say God in government is important to him.

Mike:  Why do you want to put God and government at the same level?  Shouldn’t God be above government?

Caller Dixie:  I didn’t say that I want to put God and government on the same level, nor did he.

Mike:  So God is above government?

Caller Dixie:  Absolutely.  Don’t you think so?

Mike:  Yes, I do.

Caller Dixie:  Okay then.  That’s the point.

Mike:  So then shouldn’t he then honor his commitment to God?  What then restrains him?

Caller Dixie:  Wow.  Okay, first of all, he didn’t —

Mike:  I know questions are really tough, Dixie, and people hate answering them, so what restrains them, my dear?  What restrains him from acting upon his religious compulsions?

Caller Dixie:  That’s where we hire honorable, good, respectful men.

Mike:  [laughing hysterically]

Caller Dixie:  Really?

Mike:  This is so predictable.  I could have written this answer that you would have given before you gave it.  What part of the First Amendment — now that we’ve trashed Amendment One, let’s move onto Two.  I’m going to take your interpretation of Amendment One and I’m going to apply it to Amendment Two.  I’m going to confer upon Governor Romney, President Romney soon, and upon the imperial Congress that that amendment does not mean what it says.  Romney might think that his religion, and I don’t know that it does, but let’s pretend for a moment that it does, is averse to any form of violence whatsoever and it is an act of human kindness and goodness to rid our countryside of firearms and weaponry.  First we’ll give you a chance to voluntarily turn in your firearms, but if you don’t turn them in, we will find them and melt them down at your expense.  God told me to do this and I’m going to go ahead and do this.  How about that?

Caller Dixie:  Wow, that’s an interesting interpretation.  I wonder where you came up with that.

Mike:  The same useless document that you just squandered, that you just micturated upon that apparently means nothing, madam.  The First Amendment either means something or it doesn’t.  it specifically says that there will be no establishment,  towards the states and the people in them, there will be no abridgement of their freedom to exercise, meaning you’re not going to have it in your politics.  It’s not supposed to be there.  Good grief and Lord in Heaven!

End Mike Church Show Transcript

Click here for part 1