|
|
Home | Notes
Contributors
Archives | Search
Links | About
..........
Julia Gorin
  The America Show
Episode 4
Jesus and Mordy
Watch Video Now
..........
Conservatives Are From Mars, Liberals Are From San Francisco
by Burt Prelutsky
.........
America Alone
by Mark Steyn
..........
..........
The
CRO Store
..........
..........
|
|
FELLOW
TRAVELER |
Freedom
Fades, Part II
by
Ray Haynes [politician] 9/11/06 |
In Nazi
Germany, the first step in Hitler’s effort to eliminate
opposition was to undermine the influence of churches and people
of faith. Since the church in Nazi Germany was receiving state
subsidies, it wasn’t too hard to get compliance, but
the consequences of that compliance was devastating. In his
book, The Cost of Discipleship, Dietrich Bonhoeffer describes
the effects of Hitler’s policies on the church, and how
that ultimately led to the collapse of the moral fabric of
the nation. We all know what occurred after that.
There are
several linchpins of liberty. The first is property rights.
If a persons property rights are threatened, that is, the ability
to feed their families and the right to keep the fruits of
their labor, then they will say whatever they have to say,
and do whatever they have to do to try and keep what they have.
Freedom of speech is irrelevant when it comes to keeping the
family nest egg.
Contributor
Ray Haynes
Mr.
Haynes is an Assembly member representing Riverside
and Temecula. He serves on the Appropriations and
Budget Committees. [go to Assembly Member Haynes website
at California Assembly][go to Haynes index]
|
Next is religious freedom. A government that requires a faithful
person to participate in, be complicit in, or be silent in the
face of what that person considers sin in order to survive in
society will lose all semblance of order in a very short period
of time. People of faith will ignore the law rather than sacrifice
their eternal soul. The rest of society, released from any constraints
of morality or internal regulatory restraint, will simply choose
a self-indulgent lifestyle, a lifestyle not necessarily conducive
to following any other law. The consequence to the social order
of these behaviors is disastrous.
California’s Legislature has not yet learned this lesson,
and they are making a serious attempt to undermine the church
and people of faith in California, and they are using the guise
of “discrimination” against homosexuals in order
to do it. Many people of faith believe that if they aid in or
promote homosexuality (even if they don’t engage in the
behavior themselves), they are committing a sin. They are particularly
concerned if others are trying to lead their children down the
road to this sin, because they believe it endangers their children’s
eternal soul.
So, when
the government, under the guise of prohibiting “discrimination” starts
interfering with the operations of their church or starts “promoting” homosexuality
in the schools, people of faith get upset. In the early “anti-discrimination” laws,
churches were exempted. Over the last several years, the activists
in the legislature who have advanced pro-homosexual legislation
have removed the church exemptions from their legislation. Today,
churches that run hospitals or schools cannot discriminate against
employees who are openly homosexual.
This year,
the Legislature attempted to advance that agenda even more.
It passed SB 1437, SB 1441, AB 606 and
AB 1056. Each
in their own way seeks to require people of faith to accept homosexuality
as an acceptable lifestyle. AB 606 requires school district to
adopt “nondiscrimination policies” even though discrimination
against homosexuality is already barred by state law. AB 1437
(just vetoed by the Governor) would have required schools to “not
discriminate” against homosexuals in the selection of textbooks,
although it is not clear how current textbooks discriminate.
AB 1056 requires the introduction of “tolerance” into
the curriculum (“tolerance” is the code word for
acceptance of homosexuality), and AB 1441 would require anyone
who gets state financial assistance (including faith-based colleges
and social service organizations) to not discriminate against
homosexuals in any of its operations. A rule in the religious
school against sex outside of marriage could be interpreted as
violating this law, and result in the loss of state aid to the
students of that school.
A state
that doesn’t respect religious
freedom is fascist. It is just that simple, no matter what
excuse or guise the fascism
takes. How far have the mighty fallen? CRO
Mr.
Haynes is a California Assemblyman repesenting Riverside
and Temecula and frequent contributor to CaliforniaRepublic.org.
§
|
|
|
