Task Force Publishes Report on Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias and Restoring Religious Liberty

Pommer said:

Is it not the law-of-the land?

Click to expand...

The Treaty of Tripoli? The one that has the famous phrase "the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion" is certainly not law of the land. First, this phrase is actually not even in the original Arabic, but only the English translation, and I don't think anything that isn't in the version of the treaty both sides agreed to is in any way binding. Second, given the full context is:

"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,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan 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."

The point, therefore, is simply to say that the United States (the government) doesn't have enmity towards the Muslims for not being Christian. This would seem to not do anything more in terms of US laws than the First Amendment.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the original treaty that this phrase was found in was abrogated less than a decade later and replaced with a new one that did not include the applicable phrase. So even if that phrase was law of the land, it was only the case from 1797 to 1805.

Now, some use the phrase in this treaty not to try to argue it means anything legally, but that the fact it was passed showed attitudes towards religion in the government (even if not in the original Arabic, the phrase was found in the English presented to Congress). Now, as I noted, I don't think it would mean anything more than the First Amendment already says, but I do not think passing the treaty that had the phrase means much in terms of what the people in government thought about the subject. They were desperate to stop the attacks on US ships by the pirates (the whole purpose of the treaty was to get Tripoli to reign in the pirates, as US ships no longer could rely on British ships for protection) to the point they were agreeing with a treaty to pay them a lot of money to make the attacks stop. What was Congress supposed to do, even if they had disagreement on it--send the treaty team all the way back to renegotiate the treaty to remove that one phrase that wasn't particularly important to the treaty, then have them come all the way back, which would have taken months given the slow travel pace back then, all the while the pirates were attacking US ships and kidnapping Americans?

The Treaty of Tripoli is sometimes used as a bit of a "gotcha!" but I don't think it means anything more than the Supreme Court decision Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States referring to the US as a "Christian nation".

RileyG said:

Yikes! That’s horrifying!

Click to expand...

Pete (Peter Daniel) Newman appears to be the individual matching most of the details in your query. He was a prominent youth speaker, counselor, and later director at Kanakuk Kamps (a large Christian sports camp network in Missouri), with connections to youth ministry and speaking engagements including at Camp Lee in Alabama. Key facts from public reports:

• Background and role: Newman, from Auburn University (where he was involved in youth ministry), started as a counselor at Kanakuk around 1996 and rose to assistant director and director of K-Kountry (for younger campers). He was charismatic, often featured in promotions, led father-son retreats, and served as a speaker at youth events and camps across the country, including multiple times at Camp Lee near Anniston, Alabama (e.g., a 2009 retreat attended by groups from Selma).
• Arrest and conviction: Arrested in September 2009 in Missouri after confessing to camp leadership earlier that year. He pleaded guilty to charges including first- and second-degree statutory sodomy and enticement of a child. He was sentenced in 2010 to two life terms plus 30 years. Prosecutors described him as one of the most prolific child molesters they had encountered, with dozens of alleged victims (at least 57 reported before sentencing; the total is believed to be higher). Abuse involved grooming via Bible studies, hot tub sessions, nudity, fondling, masturbation, and more severe acts, often with boys he met through camp or related ministries. Some abuse allegedly occurred on trips, at his home, or elsewhere.
• Camp awareness: Reports and lawsuits indicate Kanakuk leadership received complaints about his behavior (e.g., nudity with campers) as early as 1999 and issued a performance plan in 2003, but he was promoted anyway. After his confession, the camp fired him but faced criticism for not immediately involving authorities and for damage control. Multiple civil suits followed
• Source GROK

Stopped_lurking said:

Abuse of a system is a common secular reason for it to be changed, I just found it interesting that you would choose an example where religious reasons actually had to some part be tempered by the fact that people had different religions. The culture could accept that it was not a particularly good way to resolve conflicts.

Click to expand...

You can say the same about our culture and litigation. In discussing the holmgang, we're now in contemporary criticism of Tiberius territory, where some of his alleged practices were condemned for reasons other than why we would condemn them. As an example, duels in the US are, and were, subject to prosecution for murder, as Aaron Burr discovered after killing Hamilton in what they thought would be a sympathetic jurisdiction. Contemporary concern for the holmgang was, as you noted, abuse of the system but not so much the taking of life, whereas our culture would object to the taking of life first and potential for abuse second.

Tuur said:

You can say the same about our culture and litigation. In discussing the holmgang, we're now in contemporary criticism of Tiberius territory, where some of his alleged practices were condemned for reasons other than why we would condemn them. As an example, duels in the US are, and were, subject to prosecution for murder, as Aaron Burr discovered after killing Hamilton in what they thought would be a sympathetic jurisdiction. Contemporary concern for the holmgang was, as you noted, abuse of the system but not so much the taking of life, whereas our culture would object to the taking of life first and potential for abuse second.

Click to expand...

I am not directly disagreeing with you, I agree that at some level we most likely are influenced by our culture. But I don't think it is impossible to come up with secular reasons for many laws that are acceptable at least locally. Two possible reasons that people wasn't as upset with the taking of life as today was perhaps that sudden or violent death was not an uncommon occurrence, and in the context of holmgang one could actually decline it (but you lost the legal dispute). Even the offending party could decline it but then they became an outlaw, according to "hednalagen" iirc.

Valletta said:

Please stay on topic, the topic is the report.

Click to expand...

Ok.

"The Biden DOJ pursued aggressive prosecutions against non-violent, pro-life,215 Christian demonstrators, while responding far less forcefully to violent attacks against Christian pregnancy resource centers and houses of worship." page 35

Footnote 215:

215 “[T]he Roman Catholic Church created the right-to-life movement―rebranded as the pro-life movement after Roe v. Wade―by providing the early organizational infrastructure, funding, a vast communications network, peoplepower and political clout.” Lori Friedman, U.S. Abortion Politics: How Did We Get Here and Where Are We Headed?, LEHIGH UNIV. NEWS (June 3, 2019), U.S. Abortion Politics: How Did We Get Here and Where Are We Headed? | Lehigh University News.


How does the referenced footnote connect to the statement in the report? The words prosecution or Biden doesn't exist in the linked article. The word violence is only mentioned when there were violent bombings of abortion clinics.

Is this just a AI generated nonsense document?

Valletta said:

It's a footnote. The article cited does discuss the Democratic Party. Remember the government decided to target traditional Catholics and I believe directed surveillance on a priest, and there was at least discussion of infiltration of Catholic parishes. I don't think the government spun a wheel as to who to target and it came up Catholics. The Catholic Church has been the leader in the pro-life movement, and there is a radical section of the Democratic Party for whom it is a major issue. When individual government employees improperly crossed the line into illegal acts against a group it should not surprise anyone it would be directed against Catholics or pro-lifers.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is straight up lying in the footnotes. There is no connection between the statement on page 35 and footnote 215, they seem to just be making it up as they go along.

Valletta said:

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with all of the reasons for a footnote. One of the purposes of a footnote is to provide additional information that might interrupt the flow of the narrative.

Click to expand...

There is no connection between the footnote and the statement. They are just misreferencing their statement. It is not a good look to be straight up lying.

Look, how they used footnote 1 if you don't believe me.

Valletta said:

So how many people did they try to injure, throw a rock at or punch?

Click to expand...

On October 22, 2020, the Washington Surgi-clinic – a reproductive health care provider that offers gynecological and pregnancy termination services – was prepared to open with several scheduled morning appointments. Among those appointments, one was for a woman named “Hazel Jenkins,” which was later discovered to have been made by Handy using a false name. The main entrance to the clinic suite is located on the fourth floor of a high-rise building. The clinic has a separate entrance for staff several feet from the main entrance that leads directly into the surgical area, while the main entrance leads into the clinic’s waiting room. Shortly before the first scheduled 9:00 a.m. appointments, the Defendants and numerous co-conspirators had gathered at the clinic to execute a planned blockade. When the clinic’s main entrance door was opened, the Defendants forced entry into the clinic and blockaded the facility. The Defendants pushed and shoved against the clinic staff, who attempted to physically resist the Defendants. During the melee in the clinic’s waiting room, a clinic nurse was injured after one of the Defendants pushed her away from the entrance door. The Defendants used their bodies, ropes, chains, and locks to physically obstruct the clinic’s patients from obtaining, and staff from providing, reproductive health services.

Click to expand...

Valletta said:

What were the sentences when Black Lives Matters stopped all traffic on the freeway in Minneapolis, including emergency vehicles. Oh, the mob also beat up a truck driver who stopped in the nick of time.

Click to expand...

What does this have to do with comparing violations of the FACE Act?

Valletta said:

Please stay on topic, the topic is the report.

Click to expand...

The lies and distortions in the report are on topic, right?

Here's some religious people:


a quote: