And they do much of that violent crap pre-planned like organized crime operations.,

I used the word deny because you seemed to disregard the entire article because of one point you have an ideological difference with. I contend that each point deserves its own critique and analysis.

"The first is an instant red flag to lemming-leading bullshit."

Whether or not one believes in the Judeo-Christian God is separate and apart from the moral values that the Judeo-Christian ethos has brought to the world (and upon which this nation was founded). One certainly can criticize the Roman Catholic Church for its hypocrisy, but that was not the point I got from the article. Rather, the author's point was that regardless of one's belief in any particular dogma, there is no question that religion - especially Christianity - creates a sense of community that is tough to rival or duplicate and that that sense of community creates a commonality which is difficult to undermine.

We certainly don't see a strong sense of community in communist nations (which overwhelmingly tend to atheism). And we see this first point of policy working in Europe: where once was a strong sense of national identity (underpinned by Christianity), the rising secularism/socialism has destroyed much of that. We see it in the admission of Sharia courts in England, the lax immigration policies throughout the EU, the expansion of bureaucracies and the rise of one-world government. I would contend that one can go back much farther (at least a century) to see other examples. Regardless of one's view of the validity of Christianity, I would argue that the author's point is backed up by real-world events.

I would also contend that the author's second strategy is closely intertwined with the first: a secularistic/socialistic society actively tries to destroy or devalue the family unit. Only religious entities such as Christianity (and I would add several others including Judaism and Islam) agitate for strong nuclear families.