HOW ENDA ENDS WORKPLACE FREEDOM: PART TWO
By Rev. Ted Pike
5 Nov 13
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (S. 815) is scheduled to be voted on by the U.S. Senate by the end of this week. ENDA's threat to free speech and action is second only to the federal hate crimes law. ENDA is the Anti-Defamation League's workplace hate crimes bill. To understand its incredible threat, consider how far our society has drifted from the ancestral American conception of our rights.
Traditional American law gave every citizen sole control of his property, to use any lawful way he wished, even in discrimination! "Discrimination" was historically understood as an owner's prerogative to choose with whom to share their property. From Old Testament times, the laws of western Christian civilization upheld the sanctity of private property. The eighth commandment, "Thou shalt not steal," is God's endorsement. Accumulation of wealth protects us not only from want but from tyranny and is thus a bastion of independence.
The Bible relates that in the time of Joseph the Egyptians harshly discriminated against shepherd peoples such as Joseph's brethren. They considered Egypt their land and were not obligated to share with those they did not like. Modern civil rights groups would scream "Apartheid!" but the Bible does not fault the Egyptians. It tacitly concedes their right to use their property as they wished. Old Testament law upholds, without exception, the right of landowners to discriminate concerning use of what is theirs. Greed and lack of charity is condemned, but there is never any hint that private property or enterprise must be shared with anyone who demands it.
Jesus taught that an employer's right of discrimination even allowed him to pay employees very different wages. His parable of the laborers describes an employer who contracts to give workers a certain amount for a day's work. In the last hour of the workday, he hires others and pays them the same. The first laborers grumble, "We have borne the burden of the day." Yet Jesus upholds the employer's right to use his land and money exactly as he desires, even if it seems discriminatory. "I do thee no wrong," the landowner told the first laborers. "Didst thou not agree with me for a penny?...Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with my own?" (Matt. 20:1-16)
Jesus clearly inferred that our sovereign right to do with our property as we wish reflects the fact that man is made in the image of the ultimate landowner/proprietor, God. The Almighty is also entitled to use His own resources, distributing gifts as He chooses. These are Biblical values on which western Christian civilization erected its legal and social frameworks concerning private property. In America for more than 200 years, land, buildings, stores and factories were viewed as belonging to the owner, to be used any lawful way he desired. Owners had the right to hire or fire according to their will, whether their preferences were racist, bigoted or not. Their land or business belonged to themselves alone, not society. Yes, abuses always result from the greed and cold-heartedness of mercenary employers. But the sovereignty of every citizen to own and use his property has ruled western society for ages -- a law resting squarely on Biblical ethics.
Giving Away Our Birthright
Why has America abandoned that principle? It's primarily because the liberal, Jewish dominated media, as well as Jewish civil liberties fronts like the Anti-Defamation League have convinced us of the Marxist claim that the control of resources and means of production of a nation should belong to the people - not the "capitalist oppressors." Sovereign free citizens are also frightened by government and media claims that too much wealth, personal autonomy, and self-reliance beget abuse. Gradually convinced that the government is a wiser, more stable source of lifetime security, Americans over the past century have handed over their birthrights as free citizens and landowners to government.
At no time (except during Roosevelt's "New Deal") did Americans give up more than with passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, enacted in response to abuses caused by racial segregation. This unprecedented legislation was passed as a calculated attempt by liberals and Marxists to end private control of personal property.
Racial segregation in the South prior to 1964 was the formal structured legalization of man's personal freedom to discriminate, a social and government code that would admit few exceptions. Although historically claiming authorization from Scripture, in many ways it did not honor New Testament encouragement of free association between all peoples. The South contained many altruistic institutions and social organizations to make the "separate but equal" ideal workable; but segregation also bred many un-Christian attitudes and practices which generated chronic abuse, injustice, and resentment.
The Marxist revolutionary strategy for conquest of any society is to locate any pocket of friction between workers and management, or between classes or races, and heighten those tensions. In contrast to the New Testament counsel to overlook inequities for the sake of long-term peace, Marxism depends on exacerbation of grievances. Its ultimate aim is to so enrage oppressed groups that they will function as its "proletariat," ultimately toppling the landed capitalist "bourgeoisie." Communism is at war with the whole idea of people or groups owning land and property. Communists view such empowerment as a formidable barrier to their ambition of world dominion; thus,communism calls for abolition of private property. To this end, communists in government, the media, labor unions, and "civil rights" movements do their best to strip property owners of their rights. (This includes passage of land use and environmental protection laws, often crippling and harassing private industry and landowners.) When the autonomy of private owners is destroyed, the second and final step becomes possible: expropriation of landowners from their property altogether, collectivizing society under a new central communist government. Then all control has been taken from the populace and placed in the hands of the state.
The civil rights movement, culminating in federal civil rights legislation, contained a significant percentage of Marxist activists and leaders as well as Jews. The Anti-Defamation League -- the same Jewish activist group that now promotes hate crimes laws worldwide -- played a pivotal role in energizing the civil rights movement. ADL is synonymous with the Marxist agenda. (In 1962 as ADL was ramping up pressure for federal civil rights legislation, it also attempted to persuade the Portland, Oregon radio station that carried my father's broadcasts to end their contract with him. ADL told the management, "Rev. Pike is too anti-communist!")
It is well documented that Rev. Martin Luther King associated throughout his career with a number of known communist leaders (*). Just before he was assassinated, he publicly endorsed and praised Ho Chi Minh, head of the communist Viet Cong. Certainly, the civil rights movement was the dominant cause the American Communist Party championed throughout the 1960s. As a high school student between 1960 and 1964, I frequently read the communist "People's World" and "The Daily Worker," whose fervent support of integration and a national civil rights law was virtually identical in argumentation with ADL and the rest of the Jewish-dominated media.
Employers: New Victim Class
Thus, it is not surprising that, once passed, the Civil Rights Act's first order of business was to end the right of private individuals to have complete authority over their property, primarily businesses with more than 15 employees. The new law said that if a job applicant has the same qualifications as others a business owner cannot, for reasons of race, religion, or sex, deny them employment. In other words, the business you have toiled to create no longer exists to serve you but to serve the qualified masses. Property owners since 1964 must provide sustenance to others, including those they dislike. They dare not fire them for fear of a federal lawsuit.
As a result, those who correspond to the proletarian working classes are empowered to exploit employers, forcing them to submit to their desire to benefit from the employer's business. If any employer discriminates, he can face harsh fines and even a year in prison. possibly destroying his business. As a result, those Marxists have historically described as "exploiters of the masses" (businessmen) become exploited by those whom the federal government empowers!
In 1964 most Americans applauded this new inversion of workplace ethics, saying it was necessary to counterbalance centuries of oppression against the blacks. Few dreamed this unprecedented new legal and ethical system would lead to another group, homosexuals, claiming the same prerogative to take away the property rights of employers and landowners.
The simplest way to understand the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is to think of it much like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and subsequent civil rights legislation -- but with homosexuals added to the list of those who cannot be refused employment, housing, etc. Thanks to the foundation laid by the Civil Rights Act, this new homosexual rights and empowerment law is moving forward rapidly to passage in the U.S. Senate.
ADL and homosexuals consider ENDA the "second stage" of the civil rights movement. It is very difficult not to believe that those hidden social engineers and strategists (largely ADL) who created the first stage, expropriating business and property owners from their property rights in 1964, did not have this "second stage" clearly in mind.
Take Action Now!
Emergency action is immediately needed to help save freedom in the workplace. Call your Senators with this message: “Please vote against the freedom-destroying, discriminatory Employment Non-Discrimination Act, S.815.” Call Congress toll-free at 866-220-0044 or 877-762-8762. The names of all members of the Senate are available at Truthtellers.org Action Page. Especially call Republican Senators who, until recently, have been wavering. These include John McCain (AZ), Pat Toomey (PA), Kelly Ayotte (NH), Rob Portman (OH), Dean Heller (NV), Ron Johnson (WI), and Orrin Hatch (UT). Perhaps they will change their mind. If only two do so, it will defeat ENDA.
If ENDA passes in the Senate, it will powerfully influence Republicans in the House to similarly cave in to ENDA.
Call immediately. Call repeatedly all week, right up to the final vote.
* This is documented in Martin Luther King -- The Man Behind the Myth, by Des Griffin, Emissary Publications, P. O. Box 294, Colton, OR 97017, $10 postpaid (503-824-2050).