House GOP to act on religion in vets' funerals

Families of deceased veterans were shocked and angry last year when religious references were banned from funeral rituals and a Memorial Day service at Houston National Cemetery.

A lawsuit eventually resolved the matter, but a House bill would enshrine in law the lessons learned from that isolated incident.

Such protections already exist as a result of the lawsuit and Bush-era policies that protect families’ free exercise of religion at military funerals. However, the bill filed by Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, would spell out families' rights to religious expression while curtailing the government’s role.

Veteran funeral services are held at no cost to families and are offered in any of 131 national cemeteries maintained by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Veteran service organizations often attend at the request of families to perform memorial rites.

Under current law, honor guards are prohibited from participating in religious rituals except as requested by families. Problems arose in Houston when the cemetery director misinterpreted this law to prohibit all religious speech.

Continue reading at www.religionnews.com

« Previous Article

Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

Chief

If vets have the right to die for our country they should also have the right to whatever religious exercise they desire at their funeral without interuption of the government or anyone else.
- UFGator1993
  
  I agree. This kind of absurdity seems to be reaching epidemic proportions. I wonder if this is related to all the other little details from foreign soils that are creepy-crawly coming into the lives of Americans who have suffered these kinds of things silently — even from our own collegues — whom we now find are wolves in sheep's clothing… even blatently to the extent of using our very faith, our beliefs, our Christianity against us. Is it still a requirement to know our American founding history in the scolls? And in the immigration classes?
- UFGator1993
  
  I agree. Actually, this kind of absurdity seems to be reaching epidemic proportions. I wonder if this is related to all the other little details from foreign soils that are creepy-crawly coming into the lives of Americans who have suffered these kinds of things silently — even from our own collegues — whom we now find are wolves in sheep's clothing… even blatently to the extent of using our very faith, our beliefs, our Christianity against the individual. Is it still a requirement to know our American founding history in the schools? And in the immigration classes? … this writer wonders.
- keyboardshark
  
  This is a perfect example of liberalism/political correctness run amok. The two go hand in hand.
Wildman

I find i totally unacceptable hat now Chaplins in the military are prohibited from using the Name Jesus, or God in their services. The same with funerals. I find it totally unacceptable that "The Day of Prayer", is o more, but Muslims can have their prayers.

I find it totally unacceptable that the ACLU, and others want the cross taken out of military cemetarys.

The administration we now have is a evil administration. Totally. They are after our freedom of religion in a big wy. They are even telling Pastors and Priests what can be in their sermons. Many things they say, which are preached is hate speach.

All I can say, the Bible is not about hate speach. Just read the words written and accept tem. See what the Lord says, and don't twist it to justify yourself. There will be people that you think may be in Heaven with you, who were always preaching the word of the Lord, that will not be there, there will be some people there, who you never expected to be there, that will be there.
- http://www.America-Betrayed-1787.com Anti-Federalist
  
  You may find exclusion of Christianity from military funerals unacceptable, but there is no basis for your objection under the U. S. Constitution. The Treaty of Tripoli is a treaty enshrined as "the supreme law of the land," by Art. VI, Sec. I. That supreme law clearly states that the U. S. is "not in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." Christianity is the only religion so excluded.
  
  Thus, Muslims are totally within their rights under Article VI to have their prayers, while Christians have no legal basis for complaint, or for insisting on their unconstitutonal Christian prayers. We have an evil administration because we have an evil Constitution that forbids any religious criterion for holding office: "No religous test shall ever be required for any office or public trust under these United States." (Art VI, Sec 3)
  
  Your frustration would be better directed against the corrupt, secular U. S. Constitution that has provoked the wrath of God on this nation. There are at least 65 points at which the Constitution directly contracts the Bible: http://www.missiontoisrael.org/blvc-index.php
  - http://conservativebyte.com Michael G.
    
    Don't call good–evil, and evil–good.
    - daves
      
      You are both so mistaken. Of course religious services in the military include references to God and Jesus and of course Christian funerals happen all of the time in the military.
      
      The sad thing is that suicide kills many more military personnel than combat does.
  - Evermyrtle
    
    You re right, this country is not based on GOD'S laws. We have been told that, for what reason I do not know but it is coming back to haunt us, today. Man has placed himself in the place of GOD, it will only work for a little while more, before HE decides to take over. That day is coming.
    
    II Tim. 3: 10-14
    
    10. But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, long suffering, charity,, patience,
    11. Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the LORD delivered me.
    12. Yea, and all that will live godly in CHRIST JESS shall suffer persecution.
    13. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.
    14.But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them
    15. And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in CHRIST JESUS.
    
    The key verse if verse 13, things will get no better, they will only continue to deteriorate until JESUS' return
    - daves
      
      We still have a few million years.
  - 1776 American WWII
    
    We are a nation founded solidly upon Christian principles… and those principles have increasingly been used negatively to cut through the goodness of this land to bring contension and annihilation, anarchy, disruption of our nation's focus on building our lines for ourseves and for our families… c.f. your rant… you are a squirmy creepy crawley on the body of an exceptional nation… yours is the work of the adversary plain and simple. sir, of which you are his colleague. You missed the boat as others have, when America sailed with every conceivable religion aboard, and now you attempt to hijack the exceptional United States of America, and you WILL FAIL.
  - keyboardshark
    
    @ Anti-Federalist:
    
    In 1816, John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said, "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest, of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." http://www.qotd.org/search/search.html?aid=1151
    
    And in 1892 in the Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States decision, the Supreme Court declared, after setting forth a lengthy list of Christian influences upon the civil institutions of the US, "These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation." http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/143/45…
    
    And long before then, in 1620, the Mayflower Compact set forth the reason that the Pilgrims came to America: "Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the first Colony in the northern Parts of Virginia; Do by these Presents, solemnly and mutually, in the Presence of God and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid." http://www.mayflowerhistory.com/PrimarySources/Ma…
    
    The Tripoli Treaty was enacted for a very narrow purpose–to make peace with a Muslim nation. Those who wrote the treaty were simply reassuring the Muslims that, by signing the treaty, they were not in any way attempting to make the acceptance of Christianity a condition. Yes, it could have been worded differently, but it does not in any way set forth a general principal about the founding of the U.S. as a nation.
    
    "That 1797 treaty was one of several that America negotiated with Muslim nations during America’s first War on Islamic Terror (1784-1816), [7] in which five Muslim countries were indiscriminately attacking the property and interests of what they called the “Christian” nations, including America. But America sought to ensure the Muslims that we were not like the ancient European Christian nations – that did not hate Muslims because of their religious faith. Thus, the full sentence in that treaty states:
    
    As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] . . . [8]
    That is, we were not one of the Christian nations that held an inherent hostility toward Muslims. (See our full article on the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli and America’s first War on Terror.)
    
    Furthermore, in 1805 under Jefferson, that treaty was renegotiated and the clause stating that “. . . the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion . . .” was deleted. [9] http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp…
    - http://www.missiontoisrael.org Ted R. Weiland
      
      Regardless what Jefferson later renegotiated, the original Treaty with Tripoli contained the words "the government of the United States of America is not any sense founded on the Christian religion." This is absolute truth:
      
      "Even David Barton admitted that the Treaty with Tripoli’s declaration is factual:
      
      '…this is not an untrue statement since it is referring to the federal government [as opposed to 18th-century America in general]. Recall that while the Founders themselves openly described America as a Christian nation …, they did include a constitutional prohibition against a federal establishment [of any specific religion]….' (David Barton, Original Intent: The Courts, the Constitution, & Religion (Aledo, TX: WallBuilder Press, 4th Edition, 1st Printing, February 2005) p. 127.)
      
      "Professor Gary T. Amos, former law professor at Regent University and the author of Never Before in History and Defending the Declaration, two books regarding the influence of Christianity on America’s founding, agreed:
      
      'The treaty is nothing more than a ponouncement “that ‘the Christian religion’ as a formal institution was not a part of the American government….”' (Gary T. Amos, Defending the Declaration (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth and Hyatt, 1989) p. 9, quoted in Gary Demar, America’s History: The Untold Story (Powder Springs, GA: 1993 /2008) p. 135.)
      
      "…For obvious reasons, many people attempt to negate this statement in the Treaty with Tripoli:
      
      'Despite the efforts of some Christian leaders to spin-doctor this document, the statement speaks for itself…. Imagine your church saying that it was “not in any sense founded on the Christian religion,” or a member of your congregation telling his neighbor that his own personal faith was “not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” If such words are unfit for Christians and their churches, how are they acceptable in a Christian government? There is simply no context that justifies the statement – other than it being a deliberate denial of Christianity.' (Christian J. Pinto, “The Church in Secret Societies,” Twenty Experts Advise You on How to Overcome the Most Frightening Issues You WILL Face This Century (Crane, MO: Defender: A Division of Anomalos Publishing House, 2009) pp. 158-59.)…."
      
      Excerpted from Chapter 9 "Article 6: The Supreme Law of the Land" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/biblelaw-constitut….
      
      In light of the fact that there is not an article or amendment that, in some fashion, is not antithetical to, if not hostile, to Yahweh's morality and sovereignty, your quotations have as much weight as did the claims of those in Matthew 7:21-23.
      - keyboardshark
        
        PART 1
        
        Why is it that when skeptics cite the Tripoli treaty, they conveniently leave out the rest of the sentence which states "…as it has in itself no character of enmity [hatred] against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] and as the said States [America] have never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
        
        Without that phrase, you are destroying the context of the first phrase. It is clear that the treaty language was designed to deal very specifically with a narrow issue, namely, to assure the Muslim nations that adopting Christianity was not to be a part of the agreement between the two nations. It was certainly not intended to be a general declaration as to the founding history of the nation.
        
        Your comparison of "Imagine your church saying that it was “not in any sense founded on the Christian religion,” or a member of your congregation telling his neighbor that his own personal faith was “not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” with this situation is preposterous.
        
        First, as i have already mentioned, you are stripping the phrase completely out of its context, and secondly, a statement of faith for a church and a treaty between two nations is such a laughable apples-to-oranges comparison that it is unworthy of respect. Of course a Christian church would not say that in was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, but it would also not be attempting to make peace with a Muslim nation either, so your comparison is waaaaaay out in left field.
        
        Here is another take on the treaty:
        
        "This article may be read in two manners. It may, as its critics do, be concluded after the clause "Christian religion"; or it may be read in its entirety and concluded when the punctuation so indicates. But even if shortened and cut abruptly ("the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion"), this is not an untrue statement since it is referring to the federal government.
        
        Recall that while the Founders themselves openly described America as a Christian nation (demonstrated in chapter 2 of Original Intent), they did include a constitutional prohibition against a federal establishment; religion was a matter left solely to the individual States. Therefore, if the article is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, such a statement is not a repudiation of the fact that America was considered a Christian nation.
        
        Reading the clause of the treaty in its entirety also fails to weaken this fact. Article XI simply distinguished America from those historical strains of European Christianity which held an inherent hatred of Muslims; it simply assured the Muslims that the United States was not a Christian nation like those of previous centuries (with whose practices the Muslims were very familiar) and thus would not undertake a religious holy war against them.
        
        This latter reading is, in fact, supported by the attitude prevalent among numerous American leaders. The Christianity practiced in America was described by John Jay as "wise and virtuous," 20 by John Quincy Adams as "civilized," 21 and by John Adams as "rational." 22 A clear distinction was drawn between American Christianity and that of Europe in earlier centuries. As Noah Webster explained:
        
        The ecclesiastical establishments of Europe which serve to support tyrannical governments are not the Christian religion but abuses and corruptions of it. 23
        
        Daniel Webster similarly explained that American Christianity was:
        Christianity to which the sword and the fagot [burning stake or hot branding iron] are unknown – general tolerant Christianity is the law of the land! 24
        
        Those who attribute the Treaty of Tripoli quote to George Washington make two mistakes. The first is that no statement in it can be attributed to Washington (the treaty did not arrive in America until months after he left office); Washington never saw the treaty; it was not his work; no statement in it can be ascribed to him. The second mistake is to divorce a single clause of the treaty from the remainder which provides its context. It would also be absurd to suggest that President Adams (under whom the treaty was ratified in 1797) would have endorsed or assented to any provision which repudiated Christianity. In fact, while discussing the Barbary conflict with Jefferson, Adams declared:
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org Ted R. Weiland
        
        Keyboardshark: "Why is it that when skeptics cite the Tripoli treaty, they conveniently leave out the rest of the sentence which states "…as it has in itself no character of enmity [hatred] against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] and as the said States [America] have never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
        
        Ted R. Weiland: Because the context does not change the fact that it still states that "the government of the United States of America is not in ANY SENSE founded on the Christian religion." And the fact is, this is factually true, just as Barton and others (who you know would argue otherwise if it were possible) admit. Even if the farmers had intended (for which there is no evidence) for the Constitutional Republic to be Christian, how could a government that is antithetical and even hostile in its founding document to the morality and sovereignty of the God of Christianity be Christian?
      - keyboardshark
        
        But the context determines how we understand the phrase, "the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." The context explains why the treaty was worded the way it was. Nor can we selectively take one treaty out of the hundreds that the US has negotiated over the years and use that as a definitive statement as regards the founding of the nation.
        
        I would agree with you, however, that the government itself was not founded on the Christian religion, in so much as the Constitution was not designed as a statement of faith, but rather, spells out how the government was to be organized, and the Amendments clarify the rights of the people as juxtaposed against the powers of the government. The idea was to limit the power of the central government over the people. It is not by definition a religious or irreligious document, but rather a legal document. The deed to my house is a legal document, and there is no mention of God nor of atheism nor any other spiritual matters, yet it serves its legal purpose well.
        
        However, as the nearly unanimous preponderance of the historical evidence indicates, the nation was founded upon Christian principles. Remember, the government is not synonymous with the nation, so while you may want to argue that the government was not founded upon Christianity, and you would be correct to a degree, you cannot argue that the nation itself was not founded upon Christian principles without willfully ignoring a vast body of documented evidence that indicates otherwise.
        
        Therefore, when I or anyone else indicates that this nation was founded upon Christian principles or was founded as a Christian nation, we mean the nation, not the government. While the Constitution was originally designed to protect the freedoms of the people to worship as they please, having been written by men of faith who were careful to include that provision in the First Amendment, it is not a religious document, unlike the Mayflower Compact, for example. It is only designed as a framework that determines how the government was to be constructed and what limits were placed upon its power. I hope you can see the distinction.
        
        As a Christian, all I expect of the government is that it stay out of the way and let me and everyone else worship (or not worship) as we please. The less we hear from the Federal government, and the less it is involved in our lives, the better.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org Ted R. Weiland
        
        "[T]he nearly unanimous preponderance of the historical evidence" does not trump the Constitution itself which is seditious to Yahweh.
        
        Indeed, the nation was founded *in the 1600s* upon Christian principles, and it was those Christian principles which were repudiated by the late 1700 constitutional framers.
      - keyboardshark
        
        Then I guess we can at least agree that the nation was founded in the 1600's and early 1700's upon Christian principles. While I understand your concerns about the Constitution, and some of those concerns may be valid, I nonetheless do not agree that we should replace it with a theocracy. As I have stated previously, the Constitution is only a framework, and the concept that decisions as to how one worships be left up to the individual without government interference seems fine to me, although unfortunately, that right is being slowly eroded, and that is our fault collectively, but I digress.
        
        I know you have written extensively of your views on the Constitution, and I certainly admire your passion on the subject. I even have a copy of your primer in my possession, but I still do not agree with the conclusions, so guess we will just have to continue to agree to disagree on the topic. I have no desire to start a fresh discussion on the matter as neither you nor I would be likely to convince the other to change their position.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org Ted R. Weiland
        
        Yes, we can agree that the nation was founded in the 1600s and early 1700s upon Christian principles. In fact, we are what we are today (meaning we're not in much worse shape) because the Colonial governments were set up as theocracies, based upon Yahweh's morality as codified in His perfect law and altogether righteous judgments (Psalm 19:7-9) that you have been effectively convinced by secularists and particularly modern-day saltless Chrisitianity to renounce.
        
        "[17th-century] America was exalted in the eyes of the world because of her applied righteousness, embodied in Yahweh’s perfect law. Since 1788, when the United States of America, as a nation, stopped following Yahweh’s laws and began following the laws of WE THE PEOPLE, our legislation has ceased providing righteous instruction to others. Instead, the rest of the world now holds America in disdain. If America hopes to regain her favored status in the eyes of the world, she must return to her original Constitution.
        
        "McGuffey’s Eclectic Reader, America’s most popular school book in the 1800s, also testified to America’s early form of theocratic government:
        
        'Their form of government was as strictly theocratical insomuch that it would be difficult to say where there was any civil authority among them distinct from ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Whenever a few of them settled a town, they immediately gathered themselves into a church; and their elders were magistrates, and their code of laws was the Pentateuch…. God was their King; and they regarded him as truly and literally so….' (William Holmes McGuffey, McGuffey’s Sixth Eclectic Reader (New York, NY: American Book Company, 1879) p. 225.)
        
        "William McGuffey was undoubtedly influenced by the writings of renowned early American preachers such as John Cotton:
        
        'The famous John Cotton, the first minister of Boston … earnestly pleaded “that the government might be considered as a theocracy, wherein the Lord was judge, lawgiver and king; that the laws which He gave Israel might be adopted….” At the desire of the court, he compiled a system of laws founded chiefly on the laws of Moses….' (Jeremy Belknap, John Farmer, The History of New-Hampshire (Dover, NH: George Wadleigh, 1862) pp. 42-43.)…."
        
        Excerpted from Chapter 3 "The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH" at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/biblelaw-constitut….
      - wesley
        
        it is the same to convince Ted that America is a Christian nation like convincing a Morman that the constitutions is just a man made document that was written wise Godly men.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org Ted R. Weiland
        
        Wesley, at least you got the first half of the Mormon aspect correct.
        
        Not only were they not divinely inspired, but Godly men do not legislate contrary to Yahweh's morality and sovereignty. You're an alleged pronomian; so why don't you do as I have done and actually examine the Constitution by the standard – Yahweh's commandments, statutes, and judgments. and then see if you think the framers were godly men.
        
        This will take some time, so in the meantime why don't you take our Constitution survey at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/constitutionsurvey… so I can send you a complimentary copy of the 85-page "Primer" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective."
      - keyboardshark
        
        PART 2
        
        The policy of Christendom has made cowards of all their sailors before the standard of Mahomet. It would be heroical and glorious in us to restore courage to ours. 25
        
        Furthermore, it was Adams who declared:
        The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature. 26
        
        Adams' own words confirm that he rejected any notion that America was less than a Christian nation.
        Additionally, the writings of General William Eaton, a major figure in the Barbary Powers conflict, provide even more irrefutable testimony of how the conflict was viewed at that time. Eaton was first appointed by President John Adams as "Consul to Tunis," and President Thomas Jefferson later advanced him to the position of "U. S. Naval Agent to the Barbary States," authorizing him to lead a military expedition against Tripoli. Eaton's official correspondence during his service confirms that the conflict was a Muslim war against a Christian America.
        
        For example, when writing to Secretary of State Timothy Pickering, Eaton apprised him of why the Muslims would be such dedicated foes:
        
        Taught by revelation that war with the Christians will guarantee the salvation of their souls, and finding so great secular advantages in the observance of this religious duty [the secular advantage of keeping captured cargoes], their [the Muslims'] inducements to desperate fighting are very powerful. 27
        
        Eaton later complained that after Jefferson had approved his plan for military action, he sent him the obsolete warship "Hero." Eaton reported the impression of America made upon the Tunis Muslims when they saw the old warship and its few cannons:
        [T]he weak, the crazy situation of the vessel and equipage [armaments] tended to confirm an opinion long since conceived and never fairly controverted among the Tunisians, that the Americans are a feeble sect of Christians. 28
        
        In a later letter to Pickering, Eaton reported how pleased one Barbary ruler had been when he received the extortion compensations from America which had been promised him in one of the treaties:
        He said, "To speak truly and candidly . . . . we must acknowledge to you that we have never received articles of the kind of so excellent a quality from any Christian nation." 29
        
        When John Marshall became the new Secretary of State, Eaton informed him:
        It is a maxim of the Barbary States, that "The Christians who would be on good terms with them must fight well or pay well." 30
        
        And when General Eaton finally commenced his military action against Tripoli, his personal journal noted:
        April 8th. We find it almost impossible to inspire these wild bigots with confidence in us or to persuade them that, being Christians, we can be otherwise than enemies to Musselmen. We have a difficult undertaking! 31
        May 23rd. Hassien Bey, the commander in chief of the enemy's forces, has offered by private insinuation for my head six thousand dollars and double the sum for me a prisoner; and $30 per head for Christians. Why don't he come and take it? 32
        
        Shortly after the military excursion against Tripoli was successfully terminated, its account was written and published. Even the title of the book bears witness to the nature of the conflict:
        The Life of the Late Gen. William Eaton . . . commander of the Christian and Other Forces . . . which Led to the Treaty of Peace Between The United States and The Regency of Tripoli 33
        
        The numerous documents surrounding the Barbary Powers Conflict confirm that historically it was always viewed as a conflict between Christian America and Muslim nations. Those documents completely disprove the notion that any founding President, especially Washington, ever declared that America was not a Christian nation or people. (Chapter 16 of Original Intent will provide numerous additional current examples of historical revisionism.)" http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp…
- Chris P
  
  As usual the Christians go off the deep end. Chaplains are not prohibited from using Jesus or God in their sermons.
  - keyboardshark
    
    Chris P says: "As usual the Christians go off the deep end."
    
    Standing up for First Amendment rights is "going off the deep end"? Then so be it.
    - daves
      
      Creating a crisis where one doesn't exist is what he is talking about.
      - keyboardshark
        
        Letting our rights slip away little by little may not seem like a "crisis" but this kind of thing has been going on far too long and needs to be nipped in the bud. So much of our rights as Christians have been eroded over the years by compromising with liberals, and it has now gotten to the stage where it is indeed a crisis. We must fight at every turn to maintain and regain our First Amendment freedoms.
  - 1778 American WWII
    
    On the contrary… The Christians are in the Safe Boat and you Chris P are off the deep end where you reside… The Chritians are vigilante to prevent the Adversary, represented by you at the moment, into the Safe Boat. We will WIN.
HadEnuf

It's coming down to the last days, what we have going on is a battle of good against evil. The secularist and anti-God left, a culture of death – abortion, homosexuality and soon to be euthanasia – have gained control of our government, media, academia, "Hollw-wood" and now business and are expanding and infecting their culure of death upon the nation that will be judged for how it responds to these demons. They are winning the war against righteousness because most of the nation has deserted God, hence, God has deserted us and as a result, the mayhem is about to begin. Either the lost souls awaken and return to God or be prepared to suffer immensely under this new Hitler and his communist minions – bet on it!
- 1776 American WWII
  
  The annihilists will NOT WIN.
- wesley
  
  the secularists anti-God left will in irrelevant in a few more years. through abortion they have killed off their next generation. if the Church of Jesus Christ wakes up to the fact there the future is theirs and they have the answer the world is looking for. it not even three hundred the church to take over the Roman Empire which Christ started with eleven disciple who abandon Christ at the garden when he was betrayed and scared even after finding out Christ had risen from the dead for they locked themselves in the upper room when Christ appeared to them. if Christ can turn these eleven cowards into bold evangelists in fifty day just thing what he could do with a church of millions with the same zeal these eleven got at Pentecost.
Wise old guy

There was no "cemetery director misinterpretation" of the law. No, it was deliberate, calculated and simply a furtherance of the aganda of the left, attempting to foce everyone into their "Godless" world!
- Randy131
  
  The main goal of the Democratic Party and Obama is to ban GOD in America, and any Democrat that says that it isn't so, is either lieing or naively stupid. The banning of voluntary prayer in our schools, government events or on government property, the banning of the 'Ten Commandments' in our court houses and schools, abortion on demand, promoting and forcing homosexuality on everybody and in everything (even to our school children), euthanasia through Obamacare's death squads (they are real and in the law), and categorizing GOD's precepts of what is described as sin to be hate crimes, all of which are planks in the Democratic Platform and on Satan's wish list. For 'Evil' to prevail, it only takes 'Good Men' to do nothing, so where are all the Christians and their righteous indignation about all these federal government dictates, they're certainly not in the Democratic Party's ranks, who are the ones instituting these evil policies.
smogdew

How DARE the Federal Gov't dictate what is allowed at Veterans' funerals? They have no respect, appreciation or show any honor toward these valiant people. And where the devil is the Pentagon in their defense of protocol due our military…they follow more the dictates of Muslims – since they give into their whims. When I learned the Pentagon confiscated and burned hundreds of Bibles sent by a private organizaton to our men in Iraq, I was sick – the Pentagon did not want our soldiers etc. evangelizing Iraqui people – when were they supposed to be doing this – while dodging bullets? But it's perfectly OK with politicians in America if Muslims come here like fleas, build Mosques, push Sharia Law and make demands on this country to stop portraying them in a 'bad light' – there is no other ligh.
They are the President's people…….the people who allow in Muslims organizations and the likes of the ACLU be damned, this is GOD'S country……..
- Evermyrtle
  
  HIS WORD has been telling us for the last 2,000 years that these days were coming. They are here, and we are not prepared for them. It is advisable that all Christians and all peoples who are interested in prolonging "order" in this world to get your Bibles out of the closet and read and study what you read. Perilous days, which were promised, have arrived ant HE is our only hope. Turn to GOD HE can SAVE!!
Evermyrtle

All Christians know that the "WORD OF GOD IS NOT HATE SPEECH! It is a book of history of the world. It tells us of GOD'S creation of the world and everything in it, it gives records of all of HIS commandments, the plan HE gave us to live by. It gives us the history of HIS people as they lived according to HIS WORD, as well at those who did not live by HIS WORD, such as the depravity of Sodom and Gomorrah and how HE destroyed it, as was HIS right, it belonged to HIM. It tells of the greatest love, ever known by mankind, when HE sent HIS ONLY SON, JESUS CHRIST, into this wicked world that we might be saved. HIS SON did not back down from the most horrible death possible, because of HIS LOVE, no hate whatsoever in HIS heart. HE DIED FOR US!!

HIS WORD tells us, also that the lifestyle of many, many in the end days would be as was Sodom and Gomorrah. Those days have arrived. It is time to seek JESUS CHRIST AS OUR SAVIOR.

The hate is spewing from those who do not know any other way to get what they want. They do not know my Savior, they do not know the HE died for them, too. They will use this hate to get anything they want, it is like a tool. and it is destroying the world. There is only one way to stop it, it is the LOVE OF OUR SAVIOR, JESUS CHRIST, WHO WILL RETURN TO CLAIM HIS OWN, BEFORE THIS WORLD IS FINISHED.
DAVID

THIS IS WAY OUT OF HAND. OUR MILITARY DESERVES BETTER. WE CAN AND WILL FLY OUR FLAGS WHEN EVER IT IS CALLED FOR. FUNERALS ARE A VERY SPECIAL PART. THE SERVICE IS HELD, THE FLAG IS FOLDED AND PRESENTED TO THE FAMILY. THERE IS A GUN SALUTE FOR THE VETERAN. GOD BLESS AMERICA, WHILE WE STILL HAVE A CHRISTIAN NATION.
- Chris P
  
  Prove that there is a god first before making this ridiculous claim.
  - http://conservativebyte.com Michael G.
    
    You've got it backwards Chris/. David doesn't have to prove there 'is' a God. You have to prove there isn't one.
  - Evermyrtle
    
    If you cannot no see and feel the signs of GOD'S presence, there is no use for anyone to attempt to show you. If you do not want to see you won't see it. You blind yourself, to the truth!!! It is so visible in everything that exists!!
  - UFGator1993
    
    Saint Anselm said, "only a fool saith in his heart: there is no God." sorry I didn't say it, but boy does it ring true… that is one on you Chris P… give it some thought before you display your ignorance that God in His infinite grace is willing to supplant by the word He has given us, c.f. the BIBLE
    - wesley
      
      that was first originally said by the Psalmist and has been quoted many times again and again.
    - msjallen
      
      Actually it was David who said it in two different Psalms…
      Psalm 14:1 The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds; There is no one who does good.
      Psalm 53:1 The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God,” They are corrupt, and have committed abominable injustice; There is no one who does good.
  - keyboardshark
    
    Chris P says: "Prove that there is a god first…"
    
    The fact that the universe and all the matter, energy and complex life forms it contains exists is proof that there is a God. Secular scientists have no valid naturalistic explanation for any of this without violating known Laws of science. So unless you can supply a valid, entirely naturalistic explanation for the existence of the above that does not violate the Laws of Science, the only logical conclusion is that there is indeed a supernatural, eternal creator God.
- 1776 American WWII
  
  We will WIN this battle, come hell or high water!
lambsev11

Hebrews 2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.
Buck

The truth is these creeps are misinterpreting nothing , they are just trying to force their own beliefs , or lack of them onto everyone .
ONTIME

Personal religious belief is private, the government has no reason or cause to interfere with that right, it is between you and your maker. By trying to usurp the religious rites of a fallen warrior was a gross overstepping of bounds by a intolerant overly political government…..
aceituna

Jesus once said, "Let the dead bury their dead". Doesn't that mean Let the Muslims bury their dead with their own rituals, but our country seems to be saying that Christians do not get the same consideration, that they cany bury their dead with Christian rituals.
aceituna

can't not cany
1776 American WWII

Those of you who think Christian values are going down exhibit a misundertanding of why American values have prevailed in spite of King George 1776, Hitler 1938, Hussein 9/11, etc, etc. If there are not enough reminders it is not for the lack of information but for the simple resistance to understand and follow Chist and His perfect life. I don't know how to add the missing piece to the minds of those who make the choice to NOT learn of Christ's life. … need clues
GOD hear our prayers

They even turned a small church area that was used for prayer…into a closet. devils are doubling. Pray that GOD will wake up many for the battle is almost here. People of GOD need to stand up now through votes and recalls. Our house is a mess…it needs to be totally cleaned up. Anyone who supports these views of the devil has to be voted out in November. Wake up EVERYONE you know.
http://aol.com Ed in Florida

WHAT, Atheist's rights are to be violated! How dare those Christians spread their peace, love, and tolerance! They should be taught to hate, interfere with free speech, deny others of their God giving rights to seek peace and understanding in a time of sorrow. When those nasty Christians speak of God in public they deny us our rights to spread hate. Those Christians should be jailed and crucified before they comfort another fallen soldier's family. We Atheist are going to stop this nonsense. Only Atheist have rights and you Christians need to just get used to it. Get the big picture yet???? There is one thing for certain, when you Atheist are on you death bed you will be dying in utter terror for what you know you have done against God.
- msjallen
  
  Good points!!!
Capt Ed

When Jesus started his church, He said and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.
http://zionica.com Grant

This how you can tell we're at the 'time of the end'-like the Bible says it. We're in a 'spiritual warfare BATTLE'. And the way to beat it is through prayer and praises to God almighty. Not by suing and getting in an 'angry spirit', which is what the devil wants. He wants us to constantly be fighting and getting even…granted I believe the veterans should have a funeral in honor of their services to this country.
I would like to be angry about it for sure, since I have lost nearly half of my famil(ies) to war.
God bless you Ed in Florida, it was people like you and us that put Jesus Christ on the cross. He died so we could have enternal life with Him…remember when He said 'forgive them, for they know not what they do…' he was speaking of us in the future. Think about that one…
msjallen

How sad this is when funerals are a great opportunity to present the gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ to those who may never enter a church except to remember someone they knew at work or a friend or even a family member. I once went to a funeral where Jesus Christ and His salvation was never mentioned; a wasted opportunity since we all will face death and it is a great time to get people thinking about eternal life as well as their life here on earth.