Nativity Scene and the "Free Thinkers"

The inappropriately named “Arkansas Free Thinkers” group sued Secretary of State Charlie Daniels because he had a nativity scene placed on the grounds of the state capitol this Christmas season. The so-called “Free Thinkers” reportedly have a membership that is 100% atheist. Do you not find it amazing that not even an agnostic graces their “free thinking” ranks? This group of “free thinkers” has apparently unanimous conformity of thought on this great question of the ages. They “know” that there is no God.

This means that they place themselves in the position of maintaining that none of the rest of us could possibly have valid information on this subject that they are not aware of. If they lived in the first century, five hundred people testifying to them (at risk of execution) that they saw Jesus ascend alive after He was dead and buried would not be taken by them as evidence that the resurrection was real, but rather as evidence that five hundred people can have the same hallucination at the same time. Even today, if they meet a man who was formerly a vile sinner who has changed into a kindly saint, they would dismiss his own explanation of “the Lord changed my heart” as mere delusion. You see they “know” that there is no God. And if you have information otherwise, they also “know” that you are mistaken and they are correct. Strong is their faith.

Such are the sort of men that the federal courts have placed over us. For the “Free Thinkers” sued to have their own “religious” display put up beside the Nativity Scene and the Federal Courts ordered the state to permit it. The “Free Thinkers” boasted that they could have gotten the federal judge to take down the Nativity Scene, but that they choose instead to have the Federal Judge force the state to display their own monument. Their display “celebrates” Winter Solstice and promotes alleged “Free Thinkers” in history along with anti-God literature.

Were Washington D.C. not full, from top to bottom in both major parties, of oath-breakers who have no regard for the Constitution, such judges would rarely be nominated and never be confirmed. For the federal judge’s ruling in this case is grossly anti-constitutional. There can be no constitutional grounds for a federal judge ordering the Secretary of State to either remove a Nativity Scene or to permit the erection of a “Free Thinker” display.

The first amendment says that “Congress shall make no law concerning the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. Clearly, Secretary of State Charlie Daniels is not Congress, and his preferences on how to decorate the capitol grounds for Christmas is not a law.

Even if the 14th amendment applies all amendment’s restrictions on the federal government to the states, what Daniels did is not a law. Therefore, Constitutional guidance for this event falls under the ninth and tenth amendments, which state that all powers not expressly granted to the Federal government (including presumably the power to determine what decorations adorn the lawn of state capitol grounds at Christmas) are reserved to the states (which would be Mr. Daniels) or to the people (which would be the voters of Arkansas who may vote out anyone whose decorating tastes they object to). The tenth amendment emphasizes that this list of rights is not exhaustive, that the states and the people also have other rights, not necessarily listed in this document, which they may exercise. And against what might those unnamed rights be exercised, if not an intrusive and anti-constitutional Federal government?