Skip to comments.Freedom Fades, Part II
Posted on 09/11/2006 9:20:07 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
In Nazi Germany, the first step in Hitlers 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 wasnt 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 Hitlers 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.
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.
Californias 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 dont 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 childrens 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 doesnt 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?
Part 1 from last week
Freedom Fades in California ^
Posted by NormsRevenge
On News/Activism ^ 09/06/2006 10:16:15 AM PDT · 12 replies · 462+ views
Freedom Fades in California ^
Posted by ParsifalCA
On News/Activism ^ 09/06/2006 3:29:34 PM PDT · 16 replies · 392+ views
Ping 4 Later
AB 1056 goes a lot further than just tolerance by giving that word an active versus passive definition. It defines tolerance to mean "attitudes and behaviors that convey respect toward individuals and groups, especially those individuals and groups that have been, and continue to be, systematically and historically marginalized. Tolerance does not mean a passive allowance or indulgence of the beliefs or practices of another individual."
To tolerate something is a lot different than to respect it. They are now demanding through legislation what will be "respected".
CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL POLICY
The Social Democratic Party is striving for the abolition of the educational privileges of the propertied classes.
Education, schooling, and research are public matters; their operation is to be secured through public institutions and the expenditure of public funds. The provision of instruction and instructional materials free of charge. Economic support for pupils and students.
The public institutions of education, schooling, culture and research are secular. All legally grounded interference in these institutions by churches and religious or ideological communities is to be opposed. Separation of church and state. Separation of church and schools. Secular technical and occupational schools and institutions of higher education. No expenditure of public monies for ecclesiastical or religious purposes.
The unified structuring of the school system. The creation of the closest possible relations between practical and intellectual labor on all levels.
The common education of both sexes by both sexes.
Standardized training of teachers in colleges and universities. [...]
Program of SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY (SPD)
Accepted at the Heidelberg Sozialdemokratische Partei Congress on September 18, 1925.
"Mere mention of the word religion has caused eruptions of animalistic rage among National Socialists."
EWALD VON KLEIST-SCHMENZIN
National Socialism: A Menace
Der Nationalsozialismus (Berlin: Verlag Neue Gesellschaft, 1932).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.