Why does the Christian rightwing need government endorsement?

William Murray is the son of Madalyn Murray O'Hair. The woman who supposedly forced religion out of public schools. Maybe the most hated person by the Christian right-wing, even two decades after her death. Actually, like most things, it was not quite that simple.

Her lawsuit of forced bible readings in public schools, was combined with another case, which led to the historic decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that states and schools can't engage in bible readings. The purpose of these readings was to convert the children of non-devout Christians, of course.

The Christian right-wing still has not gotten over the fact that they can't force and pressure children to pray and read the bible. They can of course voluntary pray if they so choose, without government pressure. Well, her son, William Murray the chairman of a group called the Religious Freedom Coalition. In truth, they support only religious freedom for people who think like themselves.

Well according to their website, the Obama adminstration has supposedly engaged in acts against Judeo-Christian values. (By the way, the term Judeo-Christian is used in lieu of just Christian values because they think it makes them sound more inclusive.)

One of these supposed acts is that the Obama adminstration has declined to host traditional services at the White House. Amazingly, the ability of people like Mr. Murray to practice their religion goes on even with this supposed grave injustice. Sigh. I am a humanist and I have written about the National Day of Reason, which is on the same day as the National Day of Prayer. The National Day of Reason gets no government help.

The President, unlike the prayer day, is not required by our government to issue a statement praising reason. Nor should it. My rights as an atheist/ humanist do not require the president to mention reason nor host any event. But, strangely, the rights of evangelical Christians, do?

It gets even worse according to Murray, the Obama adminstration is not defending the anti-gay, supposed Defense of Marriage Act. But, no president is required to defend any law by Congress, just to implement and enforce it. Obama is of course not the first president to decline to enforce an unconstitutional act of Congress.

By the way, the implication of this complaint is that the religious liberty of Christian fundamentalists is harmed in someway if gays can marry the person that they love. That very idea, is absurd. There is no religious right to discriminate against marriages of others.

Also, another complaint, the religious right-wing can't discriminate against gays in the military, because President Obama (with Congress) overturned that ban. They also complain that a military unit with a reference to a god in its' motto, was changed. Good, it should have been. It seems the only way for them to exercise their speech/free exercise rights, is with government help. Why can't they break the apron strings?