The Religion News Service has published a most wicked article. It has published an article in which the author praises the secularization of the United States and other countries (it specifically mentions Scandinavia and Japan as praiseworthy examples). It has given this article the title “Why America’s secularization is good for American democracy.” And already one can see who the author’s true god is. The only value the author finds in religion is from “strong congregational community, the meaningfulness of sacred rituals, the comfort of spiritual solace, and the power of religiously inspired charitable works.” He therefore regards all these as equal. And he finds them all in different religions, though perhaps to differing degrees.
There is only one kind of secularization that the author opposes: “The oppressive kind [that] comes from the barrel of an atheist dictator’s gun.” The other kind of secularization identified by the author is said to be “organic.” This “organic” secularization, it is asserted, occurs “as societies become more modern, educated, prosperous and rational… secularization occurs naturally within free societies and people simply stop being religious of their own volition.” This secularization, which the author sees in the United States, “comes with many positive correlates — not least healthier democratic values and institutions.” Supporting this, the author makes the dubious assertion: “No one is being forced to become secular. Millions of Americans are simply choosing to do so. And this will be good for our republic, as the existing data shows.” The author further asserts that, in addition to being more politically active than the religious, “atheists, agnostics, humanists, [and] freethinkers” are “much more tolerant than religious people.” In fact, due to having less in-group preference, atheists are “more accepting and tolerant of religious people than religious people are of them.”
That this is untrue is evident to all rational thinkers — which atheists are always eager to present themselves as. First, that it is plainly false that no one is being forced to abandon religion is clear from the fact that people have been arrested many times for praying outside the murder mills known as abortion clinics. And need I even mention the government’s illegitimate intrusion unto the Church beginning in 2020? Thus it is clear to all rational men that the godless are intolerant of religion to the utmost. — Second, that secularization is not caused by greater education and rationality, nor does it have beneficial results, is proved from the delusions current in “scientific” and “educational” circles concerning sex and gender, which the ancient schoolmasters understood much better than the high priests of Science (not science, please understand!).
The author finally ends his article by pretending to honor the freedom of religion of all Americans. He says: “This fundamental principle of our democracy, which bars the government from either promoting or persecuting religion, is essential in a society that contains millions of people with multiple religious faiths, and no religious faith at all.” Now, that the First Amendment was not intended to permit unbelief, that it does not in its words permit freedom from religion, is clear from history. And this was also pointed out by Dr. Walther in a Fourth of July Address. He says: “Now it is certainly true: Here, under the cover of religious freedom, even the principles of natural religion, which sets man apart as human, are often trampled and they even proclaim: ‘There is no God!’ Only it is useless for the atheist, who denies God, to justify this by the religious freedom guaranteed him here. The foundational Constitution of our republic permits no atheist the right of citizenship. It grants freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. Whoever cannot swear an oath to the invisible, all-knowing, and avenging Witness in heaven, can also not be a citizen of these States. If he becomes a citizen, then by his lying oath he has become a Jack-in-office and is no legitimate, rightful citizen but, rather, the moral equivalent of a thief and a murderer in our midst.” — Therefore, the author’s claim that atheists are “by far the most supportive of repairing” the principle of freedom of religion, is a blatant falsehood.
Altlutheraner 