The Liberals And "The Big Lie"
Democrats learned well from the Nazis
Hitler's Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, was famous for saying "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it to be the truth."
Just like Roe V. Wade, it's a lie. There never was a rape. Just a knocked-up, under-educated 21-yr-old woman to was used by pro-abortion activists to further their agenda. Norma "Jane Roe" McCorvey has admitted that on several occasions.
But anyhow...
ABC's 20/20 proves that the Matthew Shepard killing had nothing to do with him being a homosexual, and everything to do with a couple of meth-heads wanting to rob an "easy mark". The death of Matthew Shepard was no 'anti-gay hate crime'. It was a botched robbery... pure and simple. Period.
But don't let facts get in the way. Check out the meat and potaoes of this article from the Catholic News Service:
Democrats learned well from the Nazis
Hitler's Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, was famous for saying "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it to be the truth."
Just like Roe V. Wade, it's a lie. There never was a rape. Just a knocked-up, under-educated 21-yr-old woman to was used by pro-abortion activists to further their agenda. Norma "Jane Roe" McCorvey has admitted that on several occasions.
But anyhow...
ABC's 20/20 proves that the Matthew Shepard killing had nothing to do with him being a homosexual, and everything to do with a couple of meth-heads wanting to rob an "easy mark". The death of Matthew Shepard was no 'anti-gay hate crime'. It was a botched robbery... pure and simple. Period.
But don't let facts get in the way. Check out the meat and potaoes of this article from the Catholic News Service:
Washington D.C., Oct 28, 2009 / 06:18 pm (CNA).- President Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act into law this afternoon in the East Room of the White House. The law, which secured passage by being attached to a military spending bill, is being flagged by Christians as a possible vehicle for preventing them from teaching against homosexuality.
Named after two victims of purported hate crimes, the bill allows federal authorities to prosecute violence based on gender, perceived or actual sexual orientation, and gender identity.
Defenders of the bill say that it doesn’t target Christian beliefs because it deals with actions only and not words, but many Christians, such as Dr. Gary L. Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission say that “where hate crime laws have been enacted, it is Christians, specifically conservative Christians who hold to the historic Christian faith and it's values, that become the object of institutionalized, governmental hate."
Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, claimed that the hate crimes provision “is part of a radical social agenda that could ultimately silence Christians and use the force of government to marginalize anyone whose faith is at odds with homosexuality.”
As he signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 to which the Hate Crimes Prevention Act was attached, President Obama said, “So today I'm pleased to say that we have proved that change is possible. It may not come quickly, or all at once, but if you push hard enough, it does come eventually.”
And for whatever bizzare reason, this was attached to the military budget bill. What... it couldn't have made it on it's own? More slight of hand The Amazing Obatini.
And you can count on hearing the name of Matthew Shepard used more and more by the "Hate Speech" crowd.
posted by Kevin Whiteman at
8:53 AM
9 Comments:
Catholics, prepare to stand up for your Faith and be counted among those who follow the narrow way of Our Lord. When we are accused of being Catholic, there must be ample evidence for our convictions...
"Hate crime" is a dangerous concept anyway. If you kill a man because you want his money, or because he's gay, or because you're just having a really bad day, that man is just as dead and you're just as guilty. Putting an extra penalty on it because it's a "hate crime" criminalizes the intention-- the thought behind it. When we start criminalizing thoughts, we are in deep doodoo. Anyone who can't see this needs a basic lesson in critical thinking skills, before we all lose the ability to think at all due to the infantalization of our language (thank you George Orwell and Bill Whittle).
That being said, however, "hate crime" legislation can cut both ways. Next time a Catholic pro-life worker gets pounded outside an abortion clinic-- hate crime. Next time a conservative takes a literal beating for their views (assuming expressed verbally)-- hate crime. I guaran-damn-tee some hotshot young lawyer(s) will gobble up the opportunity to sink their hands into some deep pockets over this. And I hope that cheering them on for it doesn't put me in league with the devil.
Getting ready for the persecution
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it to be the truth."
And when the lie is told enough times, the liar himself comes to believe this. He becomes a pathological liar.
When we start criminalizing thoughts, we are in deep doodoo.
It has already happened! Academic freedom and the First Amendment's right of free speech have all but disappeared from university campuses due to officially entrenched political correctness. Criticize some protected group on campus and you will be disciplined and then coerced (or forced) to attend sensitivity training. We used to call this "brainwashing" when Communists did this to American POWs during the Korean War.
BTW Cavey: my screen presentation only on the Cave blog is still messed up when I use Foxfire's Mozilla or Apple's Safari, but not when I am using Bill Gates' and Steve Ballmer's oh so crappy Internet Explorer. The problem doesn't occur on other web sites.
One might think that if it were to be tested in the US Supreme Court, then the fact would come up that the Shepard murder was not a hate crime, and thus the law would be based on a falsity. This is somewhat different from Roe, since Roe is a Court decision and the new one is a law.
Thus, a law based on a false presupposition cannot be valid. It would be so glaring, that the Supremes would not be able to keep face before the public.
So, when does the Federal Office of Thought Police open?
& while Erin's theory sounds good, I highly doubt it will be taken seriously by the courts since hating Catholics & Pro-lifers is not considered a crime but a moral responsibility by the wackos behind this.
Al-- money talks, and sooner or later some hot young lawyer is going to try it. There was a case recently (don't remember details but the man was a speaker at a dinner I attended) where liberal thugs physically assaulted a man for (I think) filming the actions of said thugs when the thugs objected to the man's display of conservative signs on his own property. The "victim" (who is acting like anything but!) is suing the thugs, and the state in which it occurred is, in fact, processing it as a hate crime.
"It has already happened! Academic freedom and the First Amendment's right of free speech have all but disappeared from university campuses due to officially entrenched political correctness ..." (posted by Adeodatus49): Looks to me like this will be changing rapidly; see my explanation on the previous blog.
The sad thing is we who knew Obama was a wolf ready to devour everything decent in this country can only say told you so...but for how long.... Meanwhile, the fools that supported him are so blind that they still do not acknowledge his patent lies and deceptions.
Could we be witnessing the end of the U.S.A.?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home