Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Reverend Ted Pike Characterizes The American Civil Rights Revolution As A "Tilted Foundation"

Reverend Ted Pike of Truthtellers.org has published another excellent essay. On January 24th, 2008, he discussed how the civil rights revolution in America has produced a "tilted foundation". His premise is that private property rights is one of the cornerstones of our society, and that by dictating how one can use or dispose of personal property under the guise of "civil rights", the elite caused the foundation of our society to start listing towards state control, and, ultimately, tyranny. Here's the first part of his essay:

The legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. includes landmark civil rights acts of the 1960s. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting Rights Act of 1965, and Civil Rights Act of 1968 with its Fair Housing Act ostensibly enforced equality, equal opportunity, and voting rights to blacks.

In reality, these acts also granted unprecedented power to the federal government to invade states' rights and enforce not just equality but special rights and privileges for black Americans. These laws were built on the premise that blacks, having suffered so long and bitterly, were entitled not just to equal treatment but to special perpetual compensation. They would not have to earn equally high GPA's to enter college, medical, or law school. Business owners would have to atone for years of discrimination by guaranteeing annual quotas of blacks in their workforce (many of whom were less qualified than white applicants). Predominantly white taxpayers had to fund expensive bussing programs to place black children in white public schools far from their home districts.

Such preference violated the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which forbids government to grant special benefits to any group -- regardless of how deeply it has suffered.

These civil rights acts also dealt a body blow to the sanctity of personal property. The forgers of our nation believed that anyone who is a US citizen has rights to equality and justice before the law. Citizens can use all publicly owned facilities and services. They may serve on juries and in the military. They may enjoy public education, unrestrained voting rights, and freedom from involuntary servitude.

But our early ancestors never taught that any citizen can entitle himself to enjoy others’ rental property, businesses, private institutions of learning, fraternal groups or even churches, contrary to the owners’ wishes. People might suffer hurt feelings if they’re not included in privately owned organizations. But the founders knew that a much worse injustice would result from destroying private control—a right as fundamental to our heritage as free speech. (This does not apply to vital or emergency services. No privately owned companies in that business could or should ever safely deny assistance to people of any race.)

Federal civil rights acts eroded this foundation. They made private property and institutions into essentially public-controlled properties. Restaurants, apartments, educational institutions, etc.—created and kept running by the hard work and financial investment of individuals—could be sued by a racial minority who was denied access to them. Americans who insisted on their property rights became federal criminals.

Civil rights laws were predominantly meant to grant special rights to blacks, yet feminists claimed similar victim status under centuries of “male chauvinism.” They demanded and got federal concessions under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Feminists won the right to sue employers for discrimination in hiring or firing.

In 1968 the parent of the present federal hate crimes bill (Title 18, U.S.C., Sec. 2a) led to later enactment of triple penalties against anyone who committed a crime motivated by bias against federally protected groups. It also stipulated that anyone whose speech might provoke another to violence against these groups should be indicted along with the active offender.

Inevitably, homosexuals demanded the same privileges and protections as blacks and women. Through the nineties, roughly 45 states passed hate crimes laws. Most granted homosexuals virtually the same protections that blacks acquired in 1964.

Protection of homosexuals, transvestites, and transgendered people is a critically important demand of the federal hate bill, repeatedly submitted to Congress since 1998.


Read the rest of this essay HERE.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

There is absolutely no data to support the claim that the blacks who were hired were less, or more, qualified for the job than were the white applicants.

To claim something as true does not make it truth. - There are so many things wrong with this 'essay' I do not know where to begin.

The U.S government has always had the power to remove property from the people, please go back and read the many historic examples of the Federal goverment overreaching it's 'just powers'.

But I know it's easier to blame someone else for all the problems.