We should abolish the position of Chaplain for Congress - it violates the separation of Church and State. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Picking a Congressional Chaplain suggests establishing a state religion. How do you pick what religion the Chaplain should be from? Right now it's this Jesuit Catholic Priest Patrick J. Conroy who is obviously part of the Catholic Illuminati Satanic Cult. Paul Ryan just fired him and then rehired the satanic pedophile child murderer.

James Madison, one of the framers of the Constitution and later President, strongly opposed prayers in Congress on the ground that it violated the ''establishment of religion clause.'' The other founding fathers also viewed group lead prayers in Congress as violating the intent of the 1st amendment but they allowed it as a compromise with the illuminati Masons who still had a presence in the US Government even after the revolution.

James Madison wrote in answer to the question of whether the the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress is consistent with the Constitution and with the principle of religious freedom by saying:

In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the U. S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them; and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does not this involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation.

The establishment of the chaplainship to Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles: The tenets of the chaplains elected [by the majority] shut the door of worship against the members whose creeds & consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics & Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain? To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers, or that the major sects have a right to govern the minor.

The Chaplain has always been an illuminati figure who spies on our law makers - even in the days of the Founding Fathers. The Chaplain was tolerated because as long as you didn't talk to them, they couldn't learn anything from you. The attitude amongst the Founding Fathers was to tolerate the Chaplain so that the illuminati felt more in control when in reality they weren't.

The first Chaplains were all Episcopal Bishops. The Epischol church is the British version of the Catholic Church. Just as the Catholic Church are all Satanic Illuminati pedophiles, the British Episcopalian Church is too - they just bow to the Satanic Illuminati British Royal family rather than the Pope.

It seems very odd that the Founding Fathers would choose a British Church to look after the welfare of the Republic that had just won its freedom from England. The only reason they did so was that the illuminati was threatening to keep the war going but as an underground terrorist war unless they made some concessions - the chaplain was one of them. The illuminati threatened to burn down buildings, spread disease and sickness and do whatever else they could to undermine America.

The illuminati are organized crime and just as thugs threaten to burn down your store unless you pay protection, the illuminati wanted their spies to preside over the new republic as figure heads. Which is why we ended up with Chaplains who violate the 1st amendment.

During 1857-1859 - the height of the anti-masonic party's stength in America they abolished the positions of the Chaplains in the House and Senate. That was reversed once the Illuminati gained enough power again in 1860. The illuminati - who have always run the slave trade - were against the unionists and later murdered Abraham Lincoln.

In 1970 New Jersey Senator Harrison A. Williams "reminded his colleagues of James Madison's strong objection when the post was created in 1793", and "noted the modern fulfillment of another of Madison's warnings, that there would inevitably be discrimination in the appointment of such a chaplain against the (then) smaller denominations such as Catholics and Jews." Williams pointed out "that although Catholics have for some time comprised the largest religious affiliation in both the Senate and the population as a whole, there has been only one Catholic Senate Chaplain since 1793, and not a single rabbi."

Representatives and Senators generally have their own religious counsel. They go to their own Churchs, Temples and Mosques or other places of worship. If they want to see what their religious faith advises them, then by all means they should do that. They don't need a government chaplain to do that.

It seems very weird to have one Chaplain that's supposed to represent everyones religious viewpoint. If you're looking for God to advise the government, then you should be talking to me as the Messiah. I can tell you what God thinks - what Heaven thinks we should do.

And why should Senators and Reps in our government who don't believe in God have to deal with a Chaplain getting involved in policy making? The issues here are the same issues as having prayers in schools and the Supreme Court has already decided that that violates the 1st amendment separation of Church and State. Why the inconsistency? -> because the illuminati really wants to be able to spy on our policy makers with their satanic chaplains.

In 1983, this issue of whether the Chaplain was consitutional or not came up before the Supreme Court (Marsh v. Chambers) but the illuminati controlled court sided with the Illuminati and said that the Chaplain's job did not violate the separation of Church and State. The decision was only based on precedent - eg, that's how it's always been done. They didn't bother to examine the Founding Fathers intent or to examine James Madison's arguments against the chaplainship. It was a horrible, illuminati decision where they said that because they've had Chaplains for a long time, it must be Constitutional. This decision was cited in Murray v. Buchanan, which challenged the House chaplaincy, the next year in 1984.

Subsequently, on March 25, 2004, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, citing Marsh v. Chambers, dismissed a suit that challenged the congressional practice of paid chaplains as well as the practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer. Since that point, it's basically been impossible to get the Illuminati controlled Supreme Court to reverse their decision.