+menu-


  • Category Archives 1785 Religious Freedom
  • 2016 Reestablishing Religious Freedom

      2016 Simply a Bill For Reestablishing 1785 Religious Freedom

    The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom began simply as Bill No. 82,

    “A Bill For Establishing Religious Freedom.”adopted in 1785.

    1785 We the General Assembly of Virginia do enact that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief;

    1785 BUT THAT ALL MEN SHALL BE FREE TO PROFESS, AND BY ARGUMENT TO MAINTAIN, THEIR OPINIONS IN MATTERS OF RELIGION, AND THAT THE SAME SHALL IN NO WISE DIMINISH, ENLARGE, OR AFFECT THEIR CIVIL CAPACITIES.

    ————————————————————————–

     “A 2016 Bill For reestablishing 1785 religious freedom.”

    AH… BUT THAT ALL MEN SHALL BE FREE

    January 2013

    THE BAKERS SAID THEY REFUSED TO MAKE THE CAKE BECAUSE OF THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.

    The Oregon bakery owners were forced to pay more than $135,000.00 in damages.

    The Oregonian reported the state has received (TAKEN) a total of $144,000 from the BAKERS

    1785 THAT TO COMPEL A MAN TO FURNISH CONTRIBUTIONS OF MONEY FOR THE PROPAGATION OF OPINIONS WHICH HE DISBELIEVES AND ABHORS, IS SINFUL AND TYRANNICAL

    ————————————————————————————

    THEN…. THE BAKERS WERE SLAPPED WITH A  GAG ORDER THAT PROHIBITED THEM FROM SPEAKING PUBLICLY ABOUT THEIR FAITH, IN A NATIONAL DEBATE OVER RELIGIOUS BELIEFS?

    1785 … UNLESS HE PROFESS OR RENOUNCE THIS OR THAT RELIGIOUS OPINION, IS DEPRIVING HIM INJURIOUSLY OF THOSE PRIVILEGES AND ADVANTAGES TO WHICH, IN COMMON WITH HIS FELLOW CITIZENS, HE HAS A NATURAL RIGHT

    What led to his “cease and desist” order is the key to understanding why it’s accurately called A GAG ORDER THAT PREVENTS THE KLEINS FROM SPEAKING ABOUT THEIR FAITH and their intent to “stay strong” and fight this harassment by the Oregon state government.

    THE BAKERS WERE FINED $135,000.00 DOLLARS AND ALSO SLAPPED WITH A GAG ORDER THAT PROHIBITED THEM FROM SPEAKING PUBLICLY ABOUT THEIR REFUSAL TO PARTICIPATE IN OR BAKE WEDDING CAKES FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGES.

    ———————————————————————————————

      2016 Simply a Bill For Reestablishing 1785 Religious Freedom

    AH… BUT THAT ALL MEN SHALL BE FREE

    Tyler Smith, an attorney representing the BAKERS, told The Oregonian that his clients have not abandoned their appeal of Avakian’s order.

    Bill No. 82 for Established Religious Freedom was adopted in 1785.

    1785  BUT THAT ALL MEN SHALL BE FREE TO PROFESS, AND BY ARGUMENT TO MAINTAIN, THEIR OPINIONS IN MATTERS OF RELIGION, AND THAT THE SAME SHALL IN NO WISE DIMINISH, ENLARGE, OR AFFECT THEIR CIVIL CAPACITIES.

    1785 THAT ALL ATTEMPTS TO INFLUENCE IT BY TEMPORAL PUNISHMENTS, OR BURTHENS, OR BY CIVIL INCAPACITATIONS, TEND ONLY TO BEGET HABITS OF HYPOCRISY AND MEANNESS,

    1785 WHICH AT ONCE DESTROYS ALL RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, BECAUSE HE BEING OF COURSE JUDGE OF THAT TENDENCY WILL MAKE HIS OPINIONS THE RULE OF JUDGMENT, AND APPROVE OR CONDEMN THE SENTIMENTS OF OTHERS ONLY AS THEY SHALL SQUARE WITH OR DIFFER FROM HIS OWN;

    1785 THAT TO COMPEL A MAN TO FURNISH CONTRIBUTIONS OF MONEY FOR THE PROPAGATION OF OPINIONS WHICH HE DISBELIEVES AND ABHORS, IS SINFUL AND TYRANNICAL

    1785 UNLESS HE PROFESS OR RENOUNCE THIS OR THAT RELIGIOUS OPINION, IS DEPRIVING HIM INJURIOUSLY OF THOSE PRIVILEGES AND ADVANTAGES TO WHICH, IN COMMON WITH HIS FELLOW CITIZENS, HE HAS A NATURAL RIGHT;

     1785 THAT THE IMPIOUS PRESUMPTION OF LEGISLATORS AND RULERS, CIVIL AS WELL AS ECCLESIASTICAL, WHO, BEING THEMSELVES BUT FALLIBLE AND UNINSPIRED MEN, HAVE ASSUMED DOMINION OVER THE FAITH OF OTHERS, SETTING UP THEIR OWN OPINIONS AND MODES OF THINKING

    the bottom line in 1785

    And though we well know that this Assembly, elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding Assemblies, constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act irrevocable would be of no effect in law;

    YET WE ARE FREE TO DECLARE, AND DO DECLARE, THAT THE RIGHTS HEREBY ASSERTED ARE OF THE NATURAL RIGHTS OF MANKIND, AND THAT IF ANY ACT SHALL BE HEREAFTER PASSED TO REPEAL THE PRESENT OR TO NARROW ITS OPERATION, SUCH ACT WILL BE AN INFRINGEMENT OF NATURAL RIGHT.

    ————————————————————————————–

    2016 We the people must DECLARE which side of history we are on.

    AH… BUT THAT ALL MEN SHALL BE FREE

     2016 Simply a Bill For Reestablishing 1785 Religious Freedom

    Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian awarded the damages nearly six months ago, saying the owners had violated the women’s civil rights by discriminating on the basis of their sexual orientation.

    A 2007 OREGON LAW PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF GAYS, LESBIANS, BISEXUAL AND TRANSGENDER PEOPLE IN EMPLOYMENT, HOUSING AND PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS. THE STATE RULED IT ALSO BARS PRIVATE BUSINESSES FROM DISCRIMINATING AGAINST POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS.

    January 2013 when Bowman-Cryer came into the shop with her mother for a cake-tasting appointment. However, Aaron Klein told the women that the bakery didn’t do cakes for same-sex weddings. THE WOMEN FILED COMPLAINTS WITH THE STATE AND TRIGGERED A NATIONAL DEBATE OVER CLAIMS OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS AGAINST ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAWS.

    —————————————————————————————-

    Well aware that the opinions and belief of men depend not on their own will, but follow involuntarily the evidence proposed to their minds; that Almighty God hath created the mind free, and manifested his supreme will THAT FREE IT SHALL REMAIN by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint;

    1785 THAT ALL ATTEMPTS TO INFLUENCE IT BY TEMPORAL PUNISHMENTS, OR BURTHENS, OR BY CIVIL INCAPACITATIONS, TEND ONLY TO BEGET HABITS OF HYPOCRISY AND MEANNESS, and are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do, but to extend it by its influence on reason alone;

    1785 THAT THE IMPIOUS PRESUMPTION OF LEGISLATORS AND RULERS, CIVIL AS WELL AS ECCLESIASTICAL, WHO, BEING THEMSELVES BUT FALLIBLE AND UNINSPIRED MEN, HAVE ASSUMED DOMINION OVER THE FAITH OF OTHERS, SETTING UP THEIR OWN OPINIONS AND MODES OF THINKING

    as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time:

    that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness; and is withdrawing from the ministry those temporary rewards, which proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct, are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labours for the instruction of mankind; that our civil rights have no dependance on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics

    that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right; that it tends also to corrupt the principles of that very religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing, with a monopoly of worldly honours and emoluments, THOSE WHO WILL EXTERNALLY PROFESS AND CONFORM TO IT; that though indeed these are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way; that the opinions of men are not the object of civil government, nor under its jurisdiction; that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy,

    WHICH AT ONCE DESTROYS ALL RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, BECAUSE HE BEING OF COURSE JUDGE OF THAT TENDENCY WILL MAKE HIS OPINIONS THE RULE OF JUDGMENT, AND APPROVE OR CONDEMN THE SENTIMENTS OF OTHERS ONLY AS THEY SHALL SQUARE WITH OR DIFFER FROM HIS OWN;

    that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself; that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate; errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them.

    We the General Assembly of Virginia do enact that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

    1785 THAT TO COMPEL A MAN TO FURNISH CONTRIBUTIONS OF MONEY FOR THE PROPAGATION OF OPINIONS WHICH HE DISBELIEVES AND ABHORS, IS SINFUL AND TYRANNICAL

    the bottom line in 1785

    And though we well know that this Assembly, elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding Assemblies, constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act irrevocable would be of no effect in law;

    YET WE ARE FREE TO DECLARE, AND DO DECLARE, THAT THE RIGHTS HEREBY ASSERTED ARE OF THE NATURAL RIGHTS OF MANKIND, AND THAT IF ANY ACT SHALL BE HEREAFTER PASSED TO REPEAL THE PRESENT OR TO NARROW ITS OPERATION, SUCH ACT WILL BE AN INFRINGEMENT OF NATURAL RIGHT.

     2016 Simply a Bill For Reestablishing 1785 Religious Freedom

    We the people must DECLARE which side of history we are on.

    AH… BUT THAT ALL MEN SHALL BE FREE