RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT OF 1993 |
AN ILLEGAL "AMENDMENT" TO THE
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION |
|
[June 10, 1994-Revised October, 1997]
There is an
old adage: "There are none so blind as those who will not see."
In God's infinite wisdom He reminds us over and over, "Be ye not
deceived." Yet Christians stumble along blind and deceived as
they are led by blind and deceived "leaders." The Religious Freedom
Restoration Act is merely one of many deceptions successfully fostered
off to unperceptive and unknowing Christian Americans. Ironically, Mitchell
A. Tyners, associate general counsel for the Seventh-Day Adventists world
headquarters and legal advisor to LIBERTY magazine, writing for
the March/April 1994 issue, states: "It took a three-year campaign
by a coalition of religious and civil rights groups, including everybody
from Jerry Falwell to the ACLU, to get the job done!" Presumably,
Tyner meant to get Congress to illegally and unConstitutionally "amend"
the United States Constitution with a severe restriction of the free exercise
of religion by enacting the misnamed and latest Trojan Horse from the New
World Order know as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993!
Right up front,
the Christian community should view with immediate concern and suspicion
anything supported by the ACLU. Why? Because the ACLU was founded by prominent
members of the Council on Foreign Relations (the domestic organization
of New World Order advocates), and the Communist Party of America. In his
book, The Invisible Government. Dan Smoot tells us that the American
Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 "by Felix Frankfurter1,
a member of the CFR; William Z. Foster, then head of the US Communist Party;
Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, a top Communist Party official; Dr. Harry F. Ward
of Union Theological Seminary, a notorious Communist fronter, and Roger
Baldwin." Even a casual review of ACLU activities discloses their
consistent advancing of the New World Order anti-Christian agenda. It is
the ACLU that leaves no stone unturned to remove Christian prayer, the
cross of Jesus Christ, the Christmas Nativity, the Ten Commandments2,
and all other visible signs of Christianity from every aspect of American
life. What a strange bed-fellow for the Christian Right.
Using the Hegelian
strategy3 (create
the problem, arouse the opposition to it, demand a compromise / accommodation
/ resolution; and then, supply the solution which, like a baited trap,
advances the intended hidden agenda) the New World Order puppets set the
trap by a controlled Supreme Court ruling in Employment Division v. Smith4.
Upset by this ruling some Christian "leaders" took the bait and
joined ranks with the enemies of Christianity to bring about Congressional
action (signed into "law" by Clinton, another anti-Christian)
which unconstitutionally amends5
the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
To understand
this, first, requires a modicum of research into the CFR agenda so the
New World Order objectives can be documented. Secondly, with regard to
the matter of the so-called "Religious Freedom Restoration Act of
1993", one has to at least read the Act6
thoroughly. With regard to the first, it turns out that one of the major
objectives is to subvert, undermine and otherwise negate the contract currently
existing between the government of the United States and the citizens thereof,
i.e. the Constitution of the United States. In fact, so successful have
the CFR fronts been in doing this over the years (while the majority of
Christians accommodated them by accepting the lie regarding "separation
of Church and State," remaining asleep and uninvolved), that there
are now many who conclude that since our Constitution has been so extensively
ignored, it should be trashed anyway. Not quite so, since the Bill of Rights
continues to rankle the New World Order crowd by continuing to be the basis
for most court action on behalf of freedom of speech, religion and bearing
arms. This is a formidable obstacle to the New World Order objective of
eliminating American independence and sovereignty and making Americans
the subjects of an all-powerful, dictatorship, One World Government (cleverly
launched in the 1950's as the United Nations). So much of an obstacle is
the US Constitution (and the 200 years of Dictum arising therefrom) to
the New World Order advocates that they have vowed to replace the entire
document with a new one that substitutes "privileges granted by the
state"7
for the Bill of Rights, and thereby eradicate all precedents. The major
strategic thrust to accomplish this is via an open Constitutional Convention8
being vigorously and deceptively promoted for various fronted purposes,
such as getting a balanced budget amendment, prayer in the schools amendment,
a pro-life amendment, a term limits amendment, and lots of other things
that have "good sounding rings" to them. Who could oppose such
an opportunity to accomplish these marvelous things? BEWARE, this is another
baited trap into which a number of Christian "intellectuals"
(more theory than practical knowledge) and "leaders" have already
fallen. Sadly, they are being advised and deceived by "agents of influence"9
of the New World Order who have intentionally invaded the
ranks of Christian groups, waving their "credentials" as constitutional
lawyers, college professors, and Christian icons. You can be certain that
with more than three new constitutions already written and waiting
in the wings for the opening gavel of a Con-Con, should this transpire,
America and its people would never be the same again.
The second
step in furthering one's understanding, is the answer to the question:
How does the Religious Freedom Restoration Act aid the agenda to negate
and undermine the United States Constitution? Note well Section 3 of the
Act (known also as Public Law 103-141, 103rd Congress) and you will see
the hidden agenda manifested. Entitled deceptively (of course, the accomplishment
of evil purposes requires deception, half truths and lies10)
"Section 3. Free Exercise of Religion Protected," this section
provides exactly the opposite. It provides an exception to the "free
exercise of religion" - there are no exceptions to this in our Constitution
- by stating that "Government may substantially burden a person's
exercise of religion . . . if it demonstrates . . . that such substantial
burden . . . is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest."
In this day and age of rampant "Executive Orders" in total disregard
of our Constitutional rights, and a US Supreme Court that is stacked with
New World Order "agents of influence", it should be obvious that
"a compelling government interest" will be anything that serves
the purposes of the New World Order establishment elite. Are you now beginning
to understand why agents and organizations spawned by the CFR and the Communist
Party of America would support this legislation?
Attorney Tyner
provides further insight when he states in his article: "thus even
if a plaintiff files an action under both the RFRA and the Free Exercise
Clause11,
a court will reach the constitutional argument only if RFRA does not offer
the desired relief. And if the religious claim does not prevail under RFRA,
it will not under the Free Exercise Clause using strict scrutiny or any
other imaginable standard either." Here we have the objective of the
CFR agenda, i.e. the substitution of a new and uncertain statement of the
legislative branch for a two hundred year old Constitutional guarantee.
With the stroke of CFR - agent - Clinton's pen, two and a half pages of
untested and untried legislative rhetoric have been substituted and given
legal priority over an indisputable contractual right that has stood since
1791. Tyner admits that "Unfortunately, the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act is so technical that it's hard to explain without a lot of legalese."
What a hey-day the ACLU and other fronts can now have with this new weapon
to ensnare the unsuspecting "Religious Right" in endless and
costly court battles over the meaning and legislative intent of the Act
while escaping the bounds of the Constitutional contract itself. Once again12
the Christian cause has suffered a defeat.
It is incredible
(but to be expected) that this restriction of religious freedom by furtherance
of "compelling governmental interest" is extended in Section
6 of the act to "all Federal and State law, and the implementation
of that law, whether statutory or otherwise, and whether adopted before
or after the enactment of this act." Even now the EEOC is pointing
to this Act in establishing clarifying rules prohibiting "religious
harassment" in the workplace . . . thus seeking to prohibit any form
of Christian proselytizing, visual or audible. Heed well this WARNING,
my friend: there is no place in the New World Order for Christianity.
For those who know their Bible, the drum beats of Hell should become ever
more recognizable as the pagan Humanists13
usher in the New World Order.
What could
be clearer, what could be less subject to distorted and subverted legal
manipulation than the constitutional words, "Congress shall make no
law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof"? There are no exceptions here, no mitigating circumstances,
no confusing conditionalities. In the light of such leagal clarity one
should ask, "why then do we need a Religious Freedom Resoration Act"?
Why do we have to "restore" something that already exists? The
obvious answer is, we don't! One is led to say, "let's just enforce
the contract already in existence." It's certainly clear enough. But
doing the obvious would not, of course, accomplish the hidden agenda of
the New World Order advocates, i.e. to destroy (if they could) Christianity
and Biblical values. We are called by Christ to Christ; and He said, "Heaven
and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." [Matthew
24:35]
No, my friends,
the RFRA is not a victory for the so-called "Religious Right."
It is a Trojan Horse; and once again the deceitfulness of the clever strategy
of psychopolitics14
has succeeded in outsmarting and hoodwinking those who should know better.
Somehow in the rush to "open the gates" to receive this Trojan
Horse, it has been overlooked that it takes an act of congress, ratified
by 75% of the States to amend the Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution
. . . hardly something that could go by without considerable public scrutiny.
On the other hand, legislative amendments to legislative enactments can
occur anytime Congress convenes and what has been offered in one session
can be withdrawn in the next and frequently without public awareness. Note
that the current Act is called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of
1993 which as with other such descriptions presumes further similar enactments/improvements/modifications
of the future . . . of 1994, 1995, 1996 etc. Whenever Congress shall determine.
First the nose and then the hump and the rump and before one knows it,
the whole monster is in the tent! Will Christian America wake up before
it's too late?
Yet the law
of our land still provides (if anyone is interested in seeing it enforced)
that neither Congress (without subsequent ratification by 75% of the States)
nor the Supreme Court, nor the Executive Brance has the authority to amend
the Constitution. Thus, RFRA is in violation of Article V of the Constitution.
Hence, the RFRA is actually unConstitutional (as is the decision
in Smith) and both should be challenged. But who is alert or courageous
enough to bring this challenge? And to whom, at this late hour of the New
World Order, can such a challenge be brought? Our enemies are solidly entrenched,
in the courts, the legislatures, and the executive branches of governments
throughout the land. Only an informed constituency, the citizenry, the
masses, could achieve a restoration.
What is needed
to restore and protect our Constitutional rights, already clearly in place
contracturally, is not substitutional legislative deceitfulness, but a
President, Congress and Supreme Court that uphold them. We do not need
a Court that acts as a Constitutional Convention in itself to re-write
our Constitution in the name of "political correctness," the
New World Order, Humanism or anything else. Our government, those who are
elected to it and are appointed to serve it, are to be "bound down
by the chains of the United States Constitution"15
as was intended by those who framed it in the name of Justice under Law
in the American Republic. Once again, it is up to the people of America
to demand it. The time is now for aggressive and continuing confrontation
and challenge to an orchestrated Supreme Court, an elitist controlled Congress
and a Presidency that defies the Constitution of the United States, while
deceitfully taking oaths to defend and uphold it, to serve the unConstitutional,
illegal, and un-American agenda of the New World Order Advocates and those
"useful idiots" (as the Communist Nicolai Lenin called them)
who through ignorance, blindness, or self-protectionism aid and abet them.
TOMORROW WILL BE TOO LATE!
~*~
THREE YEARS AFTER THIS ARTICLE WAS PUBLISHED, THE
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECLARED THE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT OF 1993 UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN A SIX TO THREE DECISION ON JULY 25, 1997. |
SADLY, THOSE WHO WERE MISLED IN THE ORIGINAL CAMPAIGN
FOR ITS ENACTMENT NOW ARE RALLYING, AND SOLICITING FUNDS TO CONTINUE THIS ILL-CONCEIVED FIGHT ON THE TERMS AND TURF OF THE ENEMIES OF CHRISTIANITY. LET US PRAY FOR THEIR ENLIGHTENMENT. |
THIS ARTICLE PREPARED BY BERTRAM F. COLLINS IN SERVICE
TO THE LORD JESUS CHRIST. Encouragement and permission is hereby given
for this commentary to be published, copied, distributed, read, or quoted in whole, or in part, as long as no change is made in text or context; and with appropriate credit being given to LEX REX. Copyright 1997 |
1 Later becoming
a left-oriented Justice of the US Supreme Court
2 It is the ACLU that seeks to
force Judge Moore to remove the Ten Commandments from his Alabama courtroom.
3 See the article, "THE 'NEW'
ABSOLUTE: NO ABSOLUTES!" at http://www.lex-rex.com
4 494 U.S. 872 1990
5 Article V of the US Constitution
provides that amendments are made solely by Constitutional Convention or
by Acts of Congress ratified by three-quarters of the States.
6 The Act is included with this
article in the Appendix.
7 The constitutions of Marxist/Communist
countries establish the supreme "state" as granting "privileges"
to the people. The People of these countries have no "unalienable
rights granted by their creator" as do Americans.
8 See "The Constitutional Convention
'Con' Game" at http://www.lex-rex.com
9 See "Some Weapons of Modern
Warfare (Used in the War Called Peace)" at http://www.lex-rex.com
10 See "What Is Being Taught
In The Government Schools - HUMANISM" at http://www.lex.rex.com
11 The First Amendment of the United
States Constitution
12 The same coalition of Christian
leaders naively hailed the Supreme Court decision in the Webster abortion
issue case as another "victory" for their cause when in actuality
it was a serious defeat when the battle was thrown out of a single national
arena into endless skirmishes on fifty-one fronts. The pro-life movement
has yet to recover.
13 See "What Is Being Taught
In The Government Schools - Humanism" at http://www.lex-rex.com
14 See "Some Weapons of Modern
Warfare (Used in the War Called Peace)" at http://www.lex-rex.com
15 As stated by Thomas Jefferson
APPENDIX |
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1, SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993". SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF PURPOSES. (a) FINDINGS.---The Congress finds--- (1) the framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution; (2) laws "neutral" toward religion may burden religious exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious exercise; (3) governments should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification; (4) in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion; and (5) the compelling interest test as set forth in prior Federal court rulings is a workable test for striking sensible balances between religious liberty and competing prior governmental interests. (b) PURPOSES.---The purposes of this Act are--- (1) to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and (2) to provide a claim or defense to persons whose religious exercise is substantially burdened by government.
SEC. 3. FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION PROTECTED.
(a) IN GENERAL.---Government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b). (b) EXCEPTION.---Government may substantially burden a person's exercise of religion only if it determines that application of the burden to the person--- (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. (c) JUDICIAL RELIEF.---A person whose religious exercise has been burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against a government. Standing to assert a claim or defense under this section shall be governed by the general rules of standing under article III of the Constitution.
SEC. 4. ATTORNEYS FEES.
(a) JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS.---Section 722 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1988) is amended by inserting "the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993," before "or title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964". (b) ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS.---Section 504(b)(1)(C) of title 5, United States Code, is amended--- (1) by striking "and" at the end of clause (ii); (2) by striking the semicolon at the end of clause (iii) and inserting ";and"; and (3) by inserting "(iv) the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 " after clause (iii).
SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act--- (1) the term "government includes a branch, department, agency, instrumentality, and official (or other person acting under color of law)of the United States, a State, or a subdivision of a State; (2) the term "State" includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each territory and possession of the United States; (3) the term "demonstrates" means meets the burden of going forward with the evidence and of persuasion; and (4) the term "exercise of religion" means exercise of religion under the First Amendment to the Constitution. SEC. 6. APPLICABILITY.
(a) IN GENERAL.---This Act applies to all Federal and State law, and the implementation of that law, whether statutory or otherwise, and whether adopted before or after the enactment of the Act. (b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.---Federal statutory law adopted after the date of the enactment of this Act is subject to this Act unless such law explicitly excludes such application by reference to this Act. (c) RELIGIOUS BELIEF UNAFFECTED.---Nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize any government to burden any religious belief.
SEC. 7. ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE UNAFFECTED. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect, interpret, or in any way address that portion of the First Amendment prohibiting laws respecting the establishment of religion (referred to in this section as the "Establishment Clause"). Granting government funding, benefits, or exemptions, to the extent permissible under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, shall not constitute a violation of this Act. As usedin this section, the term "granting", used with respect to government funding, benefits, or exemptions, does not include a denial of government funding, benefits, or exemptions.
Approved November 16, 1993.
Click
here to return to the Reading Room