All-purpose, off-topic religious responses thread

[Lizard King]

Somewhat coincidental that these two messages should derive from different sources:

"8 Ways Satan Tries to Stop You from Worshiping​

​

1. He makes the world look beautiful, attractive and desirable.​

​

Many people profess Christ and see him as desirable for a time. For a while they enjoy private and public worship and do it all with enthusiasm. But before long Satan presents to them worldly things and makes those look more beautiful and desirable than Christ, and many souls are drawn away.​

​

“Where one thousand are destroyed by the world’s frowns, ten thousand are destroyed by the world’s smiles.”​

​

2. He makes you aware of the fact that those who worship the Lord have often faced danger, loss and suffering.​

​

There are many men who would obey the Lord and worship him, except that they fear the consequences. Satan loves to present the high cost of obedience. This was the case for many in Jesus day: “Nevertheless, many even of the authorities believed in him, but for fear of the Pharisees they did not confess it, so that they would not be put out of the synagogue” (John 12:42).​

​

3. He gives you an awareness of the difficulty of worshipping well.​

​

Satan will whisper, “It is difficult to pray well, it is hard to spend time with the Lord and to persevere until he speaks to you through his Word, it isn’t worth the effort of going to church and being warm and friendly and engaging with other Christians.”​

​

Whatever God tells you to do, Satan will present it to you as a great burden or as something you do poorly, and in this way he will keep you from it.​

​

4. He leads you to wrongly understand the implications of the gospel.​

​

Christ has done everything for you and given everything you need in his death and resurrection. There is nothing left for you to do but rejoice in Christ and to serve him out of the joy of salvation.​

​

But Satan will lead you to make wrong inferences from what Christ has done, encouraging you, for example, to believe Christ has freed you from the need or desire to spend time with him or to gather with other Christians.​

​

He will allow you to see the gospel, but do all he can to make you understand it all wrong.​

​

5. He shows you how many of those who follow Christ with obedience are poor and despised.​

​

Satan will ensure you see that those who are most interested in worshipping God are the poorest and most despised of all. You can see echoes of this in John 7: “The Pharisees answered them, ‘Have you also been deceived? Have any of the authorities or the Pharisees believed in him? But this crowd that does not know the law is accursed’.”​

​

6. He shows you that the majority of the people in the world, along with the great and mighty of the world, do not worship the Lord.​

​

Satan will ask, “Don’t you see that the great, the rich, the honorable, the intellectual elite, the wise, the most honored, and the sheer majority of people do not trouble themselves with worshipping the Lord? You would be much better off to be like them.​

​

After all, why would you think that you, of all people, have this figured out?” To have success here he will intentionally draw your attention away from Exodus 23:2 and many similar passages: “You shall not fall in with the many to do evil, nor shall you bear witness in a lawsuit, siding with the many, so as to pervert justice.”​

​

7. He fills your mind with unimportant and distracting thoughts while you are attempting to worship.​

​

He afflicts you with so much distraction and futility that you are tempted to say, “I have no desire to hear from the Lord in his Word, no desire to speak to him in prayer, no desire to spend time with other Christians in worship services.”​

​

He crowds out the very thought of worship by the sheer weight of lesser concerns.​

​

8. He encourages you to take comfort in past performances of your religious duties and in that way he convinces you to stop trying.​

​

He reminds you that in the past you read so much and prayed so much and spent so much time in worship. And having reminded you, he convinces you that you have earned the right to coast for a while. “You already know this. You’ve already done this. You’ve already prayed this. You’ve been to better worship services than this.” And through it all he inclines you to rest from worship."​

(source)

I enjoyed Hugo's analysis, especially when referencing Huey Lewis and the News lyrics:

"It don't take money and it don't take fame​

Don't need no credit card to ride this train"​

The Power Of Love / Hugo Talks

The Power Of Love / Hugo Talks

Subscribe to Website - https://hugotalks.com/blog/ Support me on PATREON - https://www.patreon.com/hugotalks Substack - https://hugotalks.substack.com/

rumble.com

I play that song on Rock Band along with their song I Want A New Drug.

 

[Lizard King]

He won't he is an actual coward. Bully personality is very present with @Daze. He claims if you don't agree 100% with islam then you hate muslims...very assumptive imho but to each their own i guess. Division starts with the likes of him

He went full jihad on me when I questioned why he was always promoting sex with nine year old girls lol.

 

[Orwell's mentor]

I think this shows you have innate Muslim tendencies.

However, "if only western women would realize"- if only they would realize... oh- but they do realize! they know very well what they are doing.

many people men and women will do anti-social things if no mechanism is in place to castigate their behavior. therefore the bounds of what is acceptable must be made clear and there must be the will and the practice to combat immorality and indecency. fighting these cancers is necesary.

Islam is really vast and I don't think it should be reduced to the issues that some refer to as "culture war" issues. Islam is primarily about tawheed. but when you look at how the west or many socities are turning into a cesspool, you can choose a stance of passively accepting the society turning into Sodom and Gomorrah and utterly sell out the next generations and be a failure in not doing anything to combat the tide of immorality..... or you can go for an option that is opposed to the wave of immorality and is effective. the option that is opposed and that is effective is Islam. Islam is the only solution that effectively deals with the moral degeneration of society. Christianity is probably second. With Christianity, you can sort of philosophize as to how the society is immoral and you can complain. But modern Christians have some strange philosophy that Christianity doesn't allow them to do anything actually effective and so they should just accept their kids being turned into harlots and homos. I have a feeling their witch-burning predeccessors interpreted Christianity a bit differently. Anyways, Islam is the only solution. It is the only solution by which we can go beyond recognizing the immorality and lamenting- and actually effectively clean up the society. of course Muslims don't really have power in the West- but where Muslims do have power, it can be seen that Muslims get results. all the other viewpoints that are counter to liberalism have apparently been stripped of their spine in a way that is very convenient to the pro-degeneracy forces.

Some of what you write reminds of a meme one of my former colleagues sent me:

​

I'm in agreement with you that Christianity has been watered down throughout the years, and that's by design.

 

[Maldarker]

He went full jihad on me when I questioned why he was always promoting sex with nine year old girls lol.

I have been bashed told i'm blasphemous told i hate muslims etc just because i question and will not bend to his tactics. So yeah welcome to the club.

 

[polymoog]

the West has been moving in the same decadent direction since around the 40's or 50's

you do know that decadent direction is NOT organic, correct? this is orchestrated by the NWO.

 

[90sWereBetter]

you do know that decadent direction is NOT organic, correct? this is orchestrated by the NWO.

Yes, I know that.

 

[ToxicFemininitySucks]

think this shows you have innate Muslim tendencies

I disagree.
It would be accurate to say i am a Bible-believing Christian fundamentalist who is not lukewarm.

However, "if only western women would realize"- if only they would realize... oh- but they do realize! they know very well what they are doing.

I agree that some realize, some don't for a variety of reasons (including self centeredness and the lack of introspection)

Years ago i was right there dressing like a harlot with the rest of them. It was the Bible that convicted me that it was wrong, to not be a stumbling block to others.

many people men and women will do anti-social things if no mechanism is in place to castigate their behavior. therefore the bounds of what is acceptable must be made clear and there must be the will and the practice to combat immorality and indecency. fighting these cancers is necesary.

As i said in your other thread, the subversion of society is by design.

Women dress like harlots because the media encourages them to and lies that it is empowerment, and that is what the stores sell - it takes actual effort to seek out modest clothing options (it's possible, but not the path of least resistance).

And as i've also mentioned in various threads, feminism is an elite funded and promoted problem.

Islam is really vast and I don't think it should be reduced to the issues that some refer to as "culture war" issues. Islam is primarily about tawheed. but when you look at how the west or many socities are turning into a cesspool, you can choose a stance of passively accepting the society turning into Sodom and Gomorrah and utterly sell out the next generations and be a failure in not doing anything to combat the tide of immorality..... or you can go for an option that is opposed to the wave of immorality and is effective. the option that is opposed and that is effective is Islam. Islam is the only solution that effectively deals with the moral degeneration of society. Christianity is probably second. With Christianity, you can sort of philosophize as to how the society is immoral and you can complain. But modern Christians have some strange philosophy that Christianity doesn't allow them to do anything actually effective and so they should just accept their kids being turned into harlots and homos. I have a feeling their witch-burning predeccessors interpreted Christianity a bit differently. Anyways, Islam is the only solution. It is the only solution by which we can go beyond recognizing the immorality and lamenting- and actually effectively clean up the society. of course Muslims don't really have power in the West- but where Muslims do have power, it can be seen that Muslims get results. all the other viewpoints that are counter to liberalism have apparently been stripped of their spine in a way that is very convenient to the pro-degeneracy forces.

If tawheed means rejection the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God then we're going to have to agree to disagree on the solution.

I also disagree that "modern Christians have some strange philosophy that Christianity doesn't allow them to do anything actually effective and so they should just accept their kids being turned into harlots and homos."

Those of us who are opposed to the degeneracy are silenced. Only the "affirming" churches/denominations are prominently showcased, and accepted as "legitimate" denominations. We're labeled "fanatics", "extremists" and "terrorists" if we do manage to get our voice heard.

Everything mainstream pushes the narrative that Christians are no longer separate from the world, while shutting out the voices of those that are.

And we have the power of the state against us. I remember reading a case of a Muslim family losing custody of their child in the US because they weren't going to "affirm" his trans delusions. It is not Christianity that is primarily at fault, but separation of church and state.

But i already discussed in your other thread the pitfalls of a theocracy: it leads to the majority denomination imposing their interpretation of scripture on everyone else. If as Christians we are concerned about our salvation, it must be understood that being legally mandated into unbiblical rituals that our conscience tells us are idolatrous is just as much a concern as our children being turned into sodomites and wh*res.

There's a reason some of the original Christian settlers fled Christian countries due to religious persecution...

 

[ToxicFemininitySucks]

People complain about wearing a mask including me but aren't burkas the original face mask. I can't think of a worse hell than to have to wear one of those especially in the extremely hot climates that they wear them in.

Burkas refer to the entire face being covered up though. And yes, it sounds unpleasant and potentially unsafe.

What are your thoughts on simply head coverings though? Supposedly it was the norm until feminism took hold.

Head covering for Christian women - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The custom has declined in America and Western Europe, though certain Christian denominations (such as those of Conservative Anabaptism) continue to require it and many Christian women continue to observe the ancient practice.[18][3] David Bercot, a scholar on early Christianity, noted that relatively recent interpretations in the Western World that do not necessitate the wearing of headcoverings by women, in contrast to the historic practice of female Christian veiling, are linked with the rise of feminism in the 20th century.[79][8

 

[Lizard King]

Burkas refer to the entire face being covered up though. And yes, it sounds unpleasant and potentially unsafe.

What are your thoughts on simply head coverings though? Supposedly it was the norm until feminism took hold.

Head covering for Christian women - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I don't see any problems with head covering as long as it is voluntary.

 

[polymoog]

Yes, I know that.

then you know this isnt a case of christianity ''going weak''. the west has simply been under bombardment of liberalism and degeneracy for many years.

 

[90sWereBetter]

then you know this isnt a case of christianity ''going weak''. the west has simply been under bombardment of liberalism and degeneracy for many years.

they are directing the same stuff at the rest of the world. the Westerners were just the most willing to go along with it.

 

[polymoog]

they are directing the same stuff at the rest of the world. the Westerners were just the most willing to go along with it.

absolutely not. we were pounded with LGBTQ pride flags on all of our bigger brands and companies. none of those big corporations dared put an LGBTQ flag/rainbow on anything marketed in the middle east (islamic dominated countries).

barely scratching the surface:

Faux-Woke Corporations Go All-Out for Pride Month--Except Middle Eas

Companies change their main social media logos to rainbow for "Pride Month" while their Middle Eastern counterparts ignore "Pride."

www.breitbart.com

 

[90sWereBetter]

I disagree.
It would be accurate to say i am a Bible-believing Christian fundamentalist who is not lukewarm.



I agree that some realize, some don't for a variety of reasons (including self centeredness and the lack of introspection)

Years ago i was right there dressing like a harlot with the rest of them. It was the Bible that convicted me that it was wrong, to not be a stumbling block to others.


As i said in your other thread, the subversion of society is by design.

Women dress like harlots because the media encourages them to and lies that it is empowerment, and that is what the stores sell - it takes actual effort to seek out modest clothing options (it's possible, but not the path of least resistance).

And as i've also mentioned in various threads, feminism is an elite funded and promoted problem.



If tawheed means rejection the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God then we're going to have to agree to disagree on the solution.

I also disagree that "modern Christians have some strange philosophy that Christianity doesn't allow them to do anything actually effective and so they should just accept their kids being turned into harlots and homos."

Those of us who are opposed to the degeneracy are silenced. Only the "affirming" churches/denominations are prominently showcased, and accepted as "legitimate" denominations. We're labeled "fanatics", "extremists" and "terrorists" if we do manage to get our voice heard.

Everything mainstream pushes the narrative that Christians are no longer separate from the world, while shutting out the voices of those that are.

And we have the power of the state against us. I remember reading a case of a Muslim family losing custody of their child in the US because they weren't going to "affirm" his trans delusions. It is not Christianity that is primarily at fault, but separation of church and state.

But i already discussed in your other thread the pitfalls of a theocracy: it leads to the majority denomination imposing their interpretation of scripture on everyone else. If as Christians we are concerned about our salvation, it must be understood that being legally mandated into unbiblical rituals that our conscience tells us are idolatrous is just as much a concern as our children being turned into sodomites and wh*res.

There's a reason some of the original Christian settlers fled Christian countries due to religious persecution...

Okay- it is a malicious conspiracy to promote immorality. Evil forces seeking to corrupte humanity have been a thing since the garden of Eden. It isn't news. Rather than seeing it as news, we should see it as the normal state of affairs.

The question isn't whether evil plots are being made to corrupt, the question is how prepared we are to stand up to the subversion.

The thing is Christianity of today... I'm not talking about Joel Olsteen Christianity- I'm talking about conservative Christianity... it has been merged with alien ideology which is classical liberalism.

The devil exists today and he existed back then as well but the West largely was better off under Christian monarchy. For anyone to assert they are against the conspiratorial forces but also in favor of the "Enlightenment" and secular liberal democracy is a contradiction.

It was freemasons who waged war "against throne and altar" and anyone who holds the position I just mentioned is out to defend the system the freemasons put in place. It is only an earlier phase of subversion rather the more advanced phase of subversion that came about later.

The history of what occurred is manipulated. The elimination of Christian monarchies (which was a step in the dechristianization of the West) and transition to secular liberal democracy was not an organic response to religious intolerance or oppression... it was simply an earlier phase of the same subversion by the same conspiratorial forces. Thus, the approach that calls to this earlier liberalism is already to set up to fail because it simply wishes to bring us to a baseline which is an earlier stage of Masonic subversion, rather than to break with the Masonic system entirely.

 

[90sWereBetter]

absolutely not. we were pounded with LGBTQ pride flags on all of our bigger brands and companies. none of those big corporations dared put an LGBTQ flag/rainbow on anything marketed in the middle east (islamic dominated countries).

barely scratching the surface:

Faux-Woke Corporations Go All-Out for Pride Month--Except Middle Eas

Companies change their main social media logos to rainbow for "Pride Month" while their Middle Eastern counterparts ignore "Pride."

www.breitbart.com

did the USSR and the US hold a gun to your head?

in Afghanistan, they had to fight two superpowers to the death to defend their way of life.

they want to push the same kind of agenda in Muslim countries but are unsuccessful because Muslims resist. even in the West- one Muslim seems to be worth ten Christians in terms of resisting immorality.

 

[ToxicFemininitySucks]

The thing is Christianity of today... I'm not talking about Joel Olsteen Christianity- I'm talking about conservative Christianity... it has been merged with alien ideology which is classical liberalism.

I definitely am not talking about joel osteen Christianity, but fundamentalism. The kind of Christianity that the MSM refers to as "extremist hate groups" despite being non violent.

The kind of churches that have statements like these on their website (i'm not going to re upload the screen shots, theyre on the post).

No, not ALL churches are subverted, but many are. Nonbelievers like to point to those that are in order to attack Christianity, and sadly lukewarm Christians never say anything back.


These are the mission statements of just a few churches that explicitly say they're not down with the degenerate satanic agenda.

But i have a feeling we're talking past each other.

I think by Christianity you mean roman catholicism, and by classical liberalism you mean the concept of going against an established hierarchy, not what one would think of as liberal values. Am i correct about that?

The devil exists today and he existed back then as well but the West largely was better off under Christian monarchy. For anyone to assert they are against the conspiratorial forces but also in favor of the "Enlightenment" and secular liberal democracy is a contradiction.

It was freemasons who waged war "against throne and altar" and anyone who holds the position I just mentioned is out to defend the system the freemasons put in place. It is only an earlier phase of subversion rather the more advanced phase of subversion that came about later.

Once again, what you really mean is "catholic monarchy", correct?

So no, i don't agree that we would be better off under the kind of compulsory "Christianity" that would punish people for not baptizing a baby, among other things.

Have you considered that the roman catholic church was already subverted, when they chose to adopt many of the pagan beliefs of the peoples they were conquering or living amongst?

How convenient that Mary the mother of Jesus gets elevated to a status of "queen of heaven" at a council in Ephesus, a city devoted to idolatry and worship of a false female idol named diana, who incidentally the Bible warns us about. A council that was decided before all the participants were even present. Sounds like a "rigged election " type of situation to me.

(Or are you saying that did in fact not happen and it was all just freemason fabrication? )

In my unpopular opinion compulsory worship that includes idolatry is just as much of a problem as the lgbtqpwth agenda.

 

[90sWereBetter]

I definitely am not talking about joel osteen Christianity, but fundamentalism. The kind of Christianity that the MSM refers to as "extremist hate groups" despite being non violent.

The kind of churches that have statements like these on their website (i'm not going to re upload the screen shots, theyre on the post).


But i have a feeling we're talking past each other.

I think by Christianity you mean roman catholicism, and by classical liberalism you mean the concept of going against an established hierarchy, not what one would think of as liberal values. Am i correct about that?



Once again, what you really mean is "catholic monarchy", correct?

So no, i don't agree that we would be better off under the kind of compulsory "Christianity" that would punish people for not baptizing a baby, among other things.

Have you considered that the roman catholic church was already subverted, when they chose to adopt many of the pagan beliefs of the peoples they were conquering or living amongst?

How convenient that Mary the mother of Jesus gets elevated to a status of "queen of heaven" at a council in Ephesus, a city devoted to idolatry and worship of a false female idol named diana, who incidentally the Bible warns us about. A council that was decided before all the participants were even present. Sounds like a "rigged election " type of situation to me.

(Or are you saying that did in fact not happen and it was all just freemason fabrication? )

In my unpopular opinion compulsory worship that includes idolatry is just as much of a problem as the lgbtqpwth agenda.

so either the government is liberal secular democracy or there is "compulsory worship"?

I don't get why people seem to think like that. I think people have been given this false idea of what a religious government would look like in order to make them accept the masonic system of liberal secular democracy. they'll do things like talk as though a religious government means the government genocides everyone who doesn't hold a particular religious doctrine.

You mention Catholicisim but I don't think even Catholic monarchies were normally out to genocide non-Catholics or anything like that (although I know there were cases where that kind of thing happened). I wasn't talking specifically about a Catholic monarchy, though.

Also, you say theocracy.

To me, a theocracy in a pejorative sense is- the government claims to be directly inspired by God.

To me, the government should have a person at the head who is religious and who presents himself as pious and a champion of the faith.

Another thing is, I think the masses of people are basically sheep. Any idea that we can change this I think is naïve. I think the masses are basically sheep. Right now all sorts of means are used to turn them into immoral degenerates. What I believe is the same sort of means should be used to encourage them to be pious.

As far as what I'm talking about with Christianity, the Francoist regime in Spain is a modern example. The ruler presents himself as a defender of the faith, morals and religiosity are strongly encouraged but I don't think anyone was genocided for not believing in the faith or anything like that. And the government also concerned itself with protecting morality.

The ruler is like a father and the state is like a family on a large scale. The people are like sheep. The ruler needs to present himself as a religious person and in this way set a proper example for the masses. The ruler also should combat public immorality. This means things like OnlyFans are shut down. This means lgbt is criminalized. This means people who involve themselves in open, public immorality are cracked down upon.

The ordinary masses of people are not these bright intellectual people. They are like sheep. They need to be guided and they will be guided. If they're not guided by moral people, they will be guided by immoral people.

You can engineer the society to have moral values just like it is currently engineered to have immoral values.

So I believe the state should enjoin the good and forbid the evil, it should promote morality and combat immorality. I don't think there is anything about this that implies the ruler is going to genocide non-believers or anything like that.

Of course I think the state should be Muslim and I hold that Islam is the only acceptable religion in the sight of Allah.

But I think Western society would be better off if Christians would think more like their medieval predeccessors and not be ok with things like secularism and not think things like "you can't legislate morality". I mean true you can't force people to be truly moral... but you can persecute open immorality, promote morality and guide the masses of people to following higher moral standards just as they are currently guided to being degenerates.

Just talking against immorality is not enough. Relatively more moral societies can be built and it should be done by things like "legislating morality". Look at covid. The masses will go along with whatever. You can make them go along with moral principles just like you can make them go along with covid mania.

 

[polymoog]

The ruler is like a father and the state is like a family on a large scale. The people are like sheep. The ruler needs to present himself as a religious person and in this way set a proper example for the masses. The ruler also should combat public immorality. This means things like OnlyFans are shut down. This means lgbt is criminalized. This means people who involve themselves in open, public immorality are cracked down upon.

what is it with muslims absolutely loving authoritarianism? thats fine-- just keep it OUT of my country. ill GLADLY put up with the degeneracy if it means i get to keep my freedom of speech.

So I believe the state should enjoin the good and forbid the evil, it should promote morality and combat immorality. I don't think there is anything about this that implies the ruler is going to genocide non-believers or anything like that.

you just said that you knew the NWO was pushing the degeneracy in the west. now you want to give them the right to combat immorality? how do you think thatll turn out?

Just talking against immorality is not enough. Relatively more moral societies can be built and it should be done by things like "legislating morality". Look at covid. The masses will go along with whatever. You can make them go along with moral principles just like you can make them go along with covid mania.

islam: "its a religion of peace..."
also islam: "you WILL be moral or expect to be punished."

if only the NWO were muslims...

 

[ToxicFemininitySucks]

so either the government is liberal secular democracy or there is "compulsory worship"?

I don't get why people seem to think like that

Because unfortunately that's how it usually ends up. As seen by past examples.

As far as what I'm talking about with Christianity, the Francoist regime in Spain is a modern example. The ruler presents himself as a defender of the faith, morals and religiosity are strongly encouraged but I don't think anyone was genocided for not believing

I admit i didnt know anything about francoist spain, so i went and looked it up.

What i found was that protestant pastors were forced to leave their country and some were executed. Non catholic Bibles were banned. Protestant churches were not allowed to show any indication that they were churches.

In effect, non catholics were second class citizens.

Isn't this in fact what muslims offer non muslims in their countries? Not genocide, but second class status, paying an extra tax?

As a side note, I've seen muslims claim that russia is so great and Christian, but as i understand the only kind of Christianity that is allowed is russian orthodox and the King James Bible is banned.

So yes, taking away separation of church and state does lead to compulsory worship. Or exile. Our choice for not wanting to worship - i mean venerate - Mary or wanting to wait to baptize a child until they're old enough to actually believe, as the Bible says.

But I think Western society would be better off if Christians would think more like their medieval predeccessors and not be ok with things like secularism and not think things like "you can't legislate morality". I mean true you can't force people to be truly moral... but you can persecute open immorality, promote morality and guide the masses of people to following higher moral standards just as they are currently guided to being degenerates

Our medieval predecessors were mostly illiterate and had no access to the Bible. There's no going back to that voluntarily.

But even in our secular society sodomy used to be illegal, there was no such thing as no fault divorce and acdessing filth used to have to involve a trip to the undesirable part of town. So it is possible to have a better functioning secular society, just that the elites have kicked the degenracy into overdrive.

 

[Lizard King]

Anyone want to move to the Islamic Republic of Iran?There is no separation between church and state but they will be glad to separate your head from your body if you aren't careful.

 

[ToxicFemininitySucks]

francoist spain,

The more i read about francoist spain the more it sounds horrific and there is absolutely no way that i would endorse that.

Children were taken from their parents to be raised by catholic families, in the process many children went "missing", possibly were trafficked.

People's civil marriages were invalidated unless they also had a catholic church wedding (which is impossible unless both are baptized catholic). So in effect only catholics could be married. Unmarried mothers were subject to having their children taken away.

Birth control was outlawed.

The catholic church had the power to police and investigate people comparable to the local goverment.

Some jobs required a recommendation letter/statement of good behavior from a catholic priest.

The education system was run by catholics in order to indoctrinate.


So yeah, i fully stand by separation of church and state. No one should be forced to conform to any particular organized religion.
(This does NOT mean that degeneracy cannot be outlawed, as it was for many years.)