European Author Of Banned Book: ‘It Is Christianity They Are Trying To Censor’

European authorities are not only banning Christians from writing about the Bible, but trying to keep the world unaware they have done so.

The left's absurd attack on Brooke Rollins



Recently, a simple note from Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins wishing staff a meaningful Easter and reminding them that it was a day to celebrate the “foundations of our faith” has caused those in the secular-state industrial complex to rhetorically crucify the secretary.

The right of a U.S. secretary of agriculture — or any public official — to send a pro-Easter message to staff is not only constitutionally permissible, it is deeply consistent with the text, history, and tradition of the First Amendment.

There’s a difference between hearing something and being made to say it yourself.

The First Amendment safeguards the free exercise of religious practice in public while ensuring that there will be no state-mandated religion. Critics often interpret the Establishment Clause as requiring a strict secular silence from public officials, but that interpretation is historically incomplete.

The Constitution does not demand a religion-free public square; rather, it prevents coercion or official establishment of a national church.

This kind of message is not new. It echoes in older scenes: a president bowing his head at the end of a proclamation, members of Congress listening to a morning prayer before debate begins, a phrase stamped quietly onto a coin that passes through countless hands.

Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that government may acknowledge religion as part of the nation’s heritage. From legislative prayers upheld in Marsh v. Chambers to holiday displays permitted in Lynch v. Donnelly, the court affirmed that ceremonial and traditional expressions of faith are compatible with constitutional principles.

A secretary of agriculture sending a goodwill Easter message fits squarely within this tradition.

Religious references have been woven into American governance since the founding. Presidents from George Washington onward have issued proclamations referring to God and religious observances.

Congress employs chaplains. The national motto, “In God We Trust,” appears on currency. These practices demonstrate that the framers did not intend to purge religious expression from public office, but to prevent its abuse.

Easter, specifically, has long been recognized both culturally and institutionally in the United States. Federal employees often receive time off for Easter-related observances, and presidents frequently release Easter messages reflecting on themes of renewal and hope.

A pro-Easter message that is inclusive in tone — perhaps acknowledging the holiday’s themes or extending goodwill to those who celebrate — does not coerce belief or participation. Employees remain free to disregard the message, just as they are free to observe or not observe the holiday.

RELATED: The trial lawyers come for online free speech

Skodonnell/Getty Images

There’s a difference between hearing something and being made to say it yourself. The First Amendment lives in that space. It protects the employee who quietly appreciates the message and the one who deletes it without a second thought.

Suppressing such expressions, on the other hand, risks creating a different constitutional problem: hostility toward religion. The Supreme Court has cautioned against interpretations of the Establishment Clause that demonstrate animus toward faith.

Neutrality does not mean erasure; it means equal treatment. Allowing a pro-Easter message does not privilege Christianity so long as the government does not exclude or penalize other beliefs.

In a religiously pluralistic society, the goal should not be to eliminate religious references from public life, but to ensure that they are expressed in a way that respects freedom for all.

The secretary of agriculture sending an Easter message — grounded in tradition, delivered without coercion, and consistent with historical practice — falls well within those constitutional boundaries.

Harvard’s Prayer-Free Pritzker Economics Building Is Called 'Unconstitutional'

Conditions imposed by the state of Massachusetts on a $675 million tax-exempt bond offering by Harvard raise serious questions about unconstitutionally infringing on free exercise of religious liberty, some of the nation’s foremost legal scholars told the Washington Free Beacon.

The post Harvard’s Prayer-Free Pritzker Economics Building Is Called 'Unconstitutional' appeared first on .

Finland’s Supreme Court Convicts Christians Of ‘Hate Speech’ For Saying Men And Women Are Different

In a case with global implications, Finland's high court rules discussing what the Bible says about sexuality is 'hate speech.'

Religious Liberty Commission Has Productive Meeting Without Loony Aging Beauty Queen Who Hijacked February Hearing To Bash Israel

The Department of Justice's Religious Liberty Commission convened for a productive hearing on Monday without dramatic and distracting interjections from Carrie Prejean Boller, the former beauty queen and sex tape star who was terminated from the body after using a hearing last month to bash Israel.

The post Religious Liberty Commission Has Productive Meeting Without Loony Aging Beauty Queen Who Hijacked February Hearing To Bash Israel appeared first on .

A blasphemy-light bill arrives in Virginia — and the ACLU clams up



Zohran Mamdani has wasted no time turning religious language into shocking political branding. This month, he invoked Muhammad while defending Democrats’ mass-migration posture. He also became the first New York City mayor to skip the installation of a Catholic archbishop.

Public officials can practice any faith. They can speak openly about it. The line gets crossed when government starts treating one religion as a protected political category — especially through the criminal code.

To overthrow liberal democracy, the far left needs Islam’s numbers, while Islam needs the far left’s organization.

That line is about to be obliterated in Virginia.

A Bangladesh-born Democrat state senator, Saddam Azlan Salim, introduced SB624, a bill aimed at writing a formal definition of “Islamophobia” into Virginia’s assault and battery laws. The bill would single out Islam for special treatment. No other religion would receive the same statutory carve-out.

The bill defines Islamophobia as “malicious prejudice or hatred directed toward Islam or Muslims.” The definition applies “regardless of whether the victim is actually a practitioner of Islam, provided that the perpetrator targeted such victim based on a perceived adherence to such faith.”

Is it Islamophobic to walk a dog or eat bacon or spread the gospel in the presence of a devout Muslim? If not, why not? And do we really want to test it?

People use Islamophobia as a cudgel to silence legitimate criticism of doctrine, immigration policy, and jihadism at home and abroad. A vague, politically loaded term does not belong in criminal law. It invites selective enforcement. It chills speech. It hands politicians a ready-made pretext to jail dissenters.

Call it what it is: one more step toward a blasphemy-style speech regime, enforced by the state.

In a world in which leftists — and even some conservatives — believe “hate speech isn’t free speech,” Salim’s bill should set off alarm bells for any civil liberties group that claims to defend the freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion.

And yet the American Civil Liberties Union has remained resolutely silent.

The ACLU’s “Religious Liberty” page claims it exists “to safeguard the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty by ensuring that laws and governmental practices neither promote religion nor interfere with its free exercise.”

Given that Islam commands the erasureany kind of secular and sectarian division, you’d think the ACLU’s rabid dogs would be on guard against its encroachment.

Instead, the ACLU maintains a page dedicated to opposing “anti-Muslim discrimination,” while boasting of its opposition to a Jewish charter school in Oklahoma.

RELATED: Free speech in Britain is worse than you think

Photo by Lab Ky Mo/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

The “red-green alliance” between domestic communists and Muslim invaders is the greatest threat currently facing Western countries today.

In a talk at Oxford University’s Student Union, Peter Thiel laid out the stark choice between the West continuing to flounder under the illusion that clean energy policies would drive global prosperity and the Islamic worldview, which prioritizes domination.

To overthrow liberal democracy, the far left needs Islam’s numbers, while Islam needs the far left’s organization. They have a common enemy — conservatives defending the countries their ancestors built for them — but without that enemy, these groups should actually despise each other.

The same day Mamdani invoked the name of the warlord Muhammad in the cause of open borders, the ACLU’s Instagram page shared a post about how hard it is to be “a queer teen in Idaho!” (Strangely enough, no mention about how hard it is to be a queer teen in any of the more than 50 countries that have been enslaved by Islam.)

This year we will mark the 10th anniversary of the Pulse Night Club shooting, when Omar Mateen — a Muslim Democrat — murdered 49 gay people and wounded 50 more. But in the ACLU’s response, the organization refused to mention Mateen’s name and indeed warned that his massacre of sexual minorities fit a “more politically convenient narrative fed by anti-Muslim fear and hate.”

What a reassuring thing to say to all the affected families in Orlando!

The ACLU is not an organization that subscribes to any kind of moral code. At best, it is a drive-by lawsuit factory. At worst, it is a legal arm of terrorists that openly welcomes foreign donations, which undermines American sovereignty. All the ACLU cares about is power — which, come to think of it, is something the group truly has in common with jihadists.

Europeans Testify On How Europe Is Banning Americans From Saying What They Believe

'European laws [are] now being exported by the European Union. ... American speech is already being affected.'

Vandals Desecrate California Catholic School

A TK-12 Catholic school in Long Beach, California, has suffered major damage after vandals destroyed religious icons in an attack between Sunday night and Monday morning. Holy Innocents School is a traditional Catholic school that offers a classical liberal arts education. “Our students grow academically, spiritually, and morally, preparing to become leaders rooted in faith,” […]

Here Are 10 Great Justice Alito Quotes To Mark His 20 Years On The Supreme Court

In no particular order, here are 10 great Justice Alito quotes to commemorate his 20 years on the Supreme Court.