|
Why does the Anti-Defamation League Support Pro-Gay “Hate Crimes” Legislation? By John Vennari The Jewish Anti-Defamation League fiercely supports Hate Crime Legislation to give homosexuals, bisexuals, transvestites and cross-dressers special protection that even children and the elderly do not enjoy.
When the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crime Prevention Act of 2007 was recently reintroduced in Congress, the Anti-Defamation League issued a March 20 Press Release applauding the legislation.[1] Then when Senators Ted Kennedy and Gordon Smith reintroduced the same LLHCPA into the Senate some days later, the ADL immediately issued an April 12 Press Release pledging full support. The ADL also boasted, “Forty-five states and the District of Columbia have passed hate crime statutes, many based on model legislation drafted by ADL.”[2] Why does a powerful Jewish group such as the ADL draft and support pro-homosexual “Hate Crimes” legislation? Oddly enough, an answer is found in a passing comment in Tom Wolfe’s 2004 I Am Charlotte Simmons, a novel about contemporary college life, particularly that of Ivy League Universities. Tom Wolfe is probably the most keen-eyed social commentator of the day.[3] In recent years Wolfe presents his observations through novels, in which he exhaustively investigates various aspects of the “lurid carnival of American life”, and delivers dead-on-accurate depictions written in electrifying prose. But what Wolfe portrays is not always pleasant. The “lurid carnival of American life” exhibited in his books includes the foibles, corruption, foul language and immoral behaviors of this lurid carnival, sometimes depicted in too much detail. I Am Charlotte Simmons is about modern universities, and parts of the book are raucous and obscene. I do not believe the author revels in the obscenity. It is his way of portraying the hard truths about modern life. These truths often surface in brief, seemingly throw-away observations that are dazzling in their profundity. It is once such observation I wish to spotlight. At one point of the book, a University’s star basketball players pays a more brainy student to write a history paper which the athlete hands in as his own – a common chicane that occurs in most universities to which the administration turns a blind eye. This time, however, the paper is so brainy, so full of words of which athlete does know the definitions, that the professor spots the fraud at once. Fed up with the free ride too many college athletes receive, the professor decides to act. The professor, a certain Jerry Quat, complains with some heat to Dr. Frederick Culter, the University President. They square off in the President’s office, with the Irish Catholic basketball coach present, who is trying to save the athlete from expulsion. Wolfe comments that Jerry Quat and President Culter, are both Jewish intellectuals but each of a different stripe. Culter is a refined “dark blue suit” type who mixes with the upper crust of society. By contrast, Quat is a radical progressive – a pudgy slob in his mid-fifties who dresses in grey sweat shirts, unkempt trousers and sports a Lenin-goatie. Wolfe then comments that despite the many differences between Culter and Quat, the two are in lock-step agreement on basic contemporary issues: “The man [Quat] sitting across from him [Culter] ... was of another sort entirely, despite the fact that they were both Jewish and agreed on practically every public issue of the day. Both believed passionately in protecting minorities, particularly African Americans as well as Jews. Both regarded Israel as the most important nation on earth, although neither was tempted to live there. Both were firm believers in diversity and multiculturalism in colleges. Both believed in abortion, not so much because they thought anyone they knew might want an abortion as because legalizing it helped put an exhausted and dysfunctional Christendom and its weird, hidebound religious restraints in their place. For the same reason, both believed in gay rights, women’s rights, transgender rights, fox, bear, wolf, swordfish, halibut, ozone, wetland, and hardwood rights, gun control, contemporary art, and the Democratic Party.”[4] Though the characters in the book are fictional, Wolfe’s observations are dead-on target, and help to explain why Jewish groups such as the ADL adamantly support abortion, “gay rights”, and pro-homosexual Hate Crimes Legislation. It is to “put an exhausted and dysfunctional Christendom and its weird, hidebound religious restraints in their place”. It is to further bring down today’s moribund Christendom – a Christendom made infinitely weaker by the ravages of the Second Vatican Council and its rejection of the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ. The accuracy of Wolfe’s observation is confirmed in a recent book by Rabbi James Rudin, The Baptizing of America: The Religious Right’s Plans for the Rest of Us. Here Rabbi Rudin decries the “specter haunting America ... the specter of our nation ruled by the extreme Christian Right who would make the United States a ‘Christian Nation’, wherein their version of God’s Law supersedes all human law – including the Constitution.” Rubin says this specter “more than any other force in the world today, is the immediate and profound threat to our republic.”[5] The main “specter” Rudin warns against – probably because it is the easiest target – is “Dominionism,” a fundamentalist version of the Social Kingship of Christ that is more Calvinist than Christian. “Christocrats”, as Rubin calls them, are seeking to “baptize America”, and it is necessary for the forces of light to fight against them so that America will retain its “spiritual vitality”. Rubin refers to this conflict as a war, calling it “the most significant internal struggle since the Civil War”; a war “equally important” as the “global war on terrorism”.[6] In this book, Rudin passionately favors the abortion and homosexual freedom the “Christocrats” oppose. One of the ways Rudin defends homosexual behavior is to claim the Old and New Testament’s condemnations on homosexuality are not the last word. He points out the “fierce opposition to homosexual behavior” is based upon six sets of versus, “three from the Hebrew bible and three from the New Testament”. On page 151 he transcribes these verses: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination” - Lev. 18:22 "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for the abominable deeds, they have forfeited their lives”. - Lev. 20:13 "They had not yet retired when the townsmen, the men of Sodom, all the people from every quarter, both young and old, surrounded the house, and called Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to your house tonight? Bring them out that we may abuse them.” - Genesis 19:4-5 "Do not err; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterer, nor the effeminate, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor the evil-tongued, nor the greedy will possess the kingdom of God.” - 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 “...the Law is not made for the just, but for the unjust and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for criminals, and the defiled, for patricides and matricides, for murderers, for immoral people, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine.” - 1 Tim. 1:9-10 “For this cause God has given them up to shameful lustful lusts: for their women have exchanged the natural use for that which is against nature, and in like manner the men also, having abandoned the natural use of the woman, have burned in their lusts one toward another, men with men doing shameless things and receiving in themselves the fitting recompense of their perversity. - Romans 1:26-27[7] Rubin goes on to say that “Christocrats” employ these scriptural verses to prove once and for all that homosexuality is immoral. But “Christocrats” err, says Rubin, because they believe the Bible is free from error. He labors for numerous pages trying to demonstrate that belief in “inerrancy” is only one particular form of Scriptural interpretation, but there are other forms as well – and no one form can claim to be definitively true. Unfortunately, he quotes modernist Scriptural scholars, both Catholic and Protestant, who favor the “other form” that reduces to nothingness the Scripture’s obvious and literal meaning. Rudin says, “inerrancy runs completely counter to both the historic Jewish understanding of the Bible and to the teachings of most Christians, Jews, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox Christians, and may Protestants and have a long tradition of biblical commentary and analysis.”[8] This is certainly not true of Catholicism, though Rubin gets all the juice possible out modern, ambiguous texts that give the impression the Catholic Church does not believe in Biblical inerrancy. On this point, Rubin is careful not to mention the “long tradition” of Catholic doctrine on Biblical inerrancy summarized in Pope Leo XIII’s Providentissimus Deus: “All the books that the Church receive as sacred and canonical (the books of the Bible) are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost: and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it...This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican [Vatican I]... Hence, because the Holy Ghost employed men as his instruments, we cannot therefore say that it was these inspired instruments who, perchance, have fallen into error.”[9] Rabbi Rudin’s perfidious approach to Scripture is not surprising, since the ADL’s Rabbi Leon Klenicki likewise teaches the Gospels are not historically true. As mentioned in the current CFN, Klenicki claims the Pharisees at the time of Our Lord were not hostile to Christ, but tried to warn Christ against Pilate’s treachery. He claims the Gospel accounts of Our Lord’s Passion cannot be accepted as accurate. Tragically, Klenicki and the ADL are not alone. There are too many modernist “Catholic” biblical commentators who accept Klenicki-style interpretation, betray the clear teaching of Leo XIII and undermine Biblical inerrancy. Another likely reason the Anti-Defamation League favors pro-homosexual Hate Crimes legislation is obvious: the ADL wants to use similar hate crime laws to battle alleged anti-Semitism, which they regard as “hate speech”. It is always the Anti-Defamation League that defines anti-Semitism, and their definition covers an enormous field. The Catholic Church has always condemned any speech or action motivated by racial hatred, but this is not good enough for the ADL. Not only does the ADL regard any legitimate criticism of Israel’s brutality against Palestinian citizens as anti-Semitic,[10] but Passion Plays, certain parts of the New Testament (particularly the Gospel of John), various writings of the Church Fathers,[11] and even the pre-Vatican II Catholic liturgy[12] are denounced by the ADL as brimming with anti-Semitism. The battle against alleged anti-Semitism expands to the Internet, as the ADL wants to ban from the worldwide web anything it deems anti-Semitic. Abraham Foxman speaks of the “dark underbelly” of the Internet, “where the virus of anti-Semitism is ready to spread.” He boasts that “ADL has worked closely with several major Internet companies to establish and enforce clear guidelines regulating what is acceptable and unacceptable on their sites.” Foxman also boasts that the ADL has “developed software to block access to Internet sites that ADL believes promote hate.”[13] The main target of this software, at the moment, appears to be some cruddy Nazi websites — once again, the easiest, most obvious targets. But it is not unthinkable that ADL censuring could spread to Catholic websites, particularly, Traditional Catholic websites. Already, as CFN readers know, traditional Catholics have already been falsely branded by the radical Southern Poverty Law Center as anti-Semitic hate groups.[14] It is instructive to contrast the ADL’s zeal for blocking allegedly “anti-semitic” sites with its support for the “flow of abortion information” on the web. In 1996, the Anti-Defamation League publicly protested a Telecommunications Bill that “could prohibit the dissemination of information about abortion on the Internet.”[15] David H. Strassler, (former) ADL National Chairman, and Abraham Foxman said in an ADL press release: “We believe the amendment added by Congressman Henry Hyde violates the Constitution and poses a significant threat to the continued flow of information about abortion on the electronic superhighway, and could seriously interfere with a woman’s right to receive abortion material on-line.” Strassler and Foxman concluded: “We understand that abortion supporters have initiated a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of this provision, and we support this legal challenge. It is inconceivable to us that any court would uphold such a blatant restriction on the freedom of speech.” The ADL is all for “freedom of speech” for the abortion industry to disseminate information on how a mother can hire a doctor to butcher her unborn baby, but the same ADL wants to censure anything it broadly considers to be anti-Semitic, and works to establish pro-homosexual “hate crime” measures to criminalize Christian teaching as “hate speech”. Thus it is clear: the Homosexual Collective and the Anti-Defamation League share a common enemy: the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church throughout the ages. As far as the ADL and various Jewish groups are concerned, fighting for abortion and “gay rights” is a means of fighting against Christianity, to further bring down “an exhausted and dysfunctional Christendom”. Notes: 1. “ADL Welcomes Congressional Reintroduction of Federal
Hate Crimes Bill”, March 20, 2007. On line at: www.adl.org/PresRele/HatCr_51/5010_51.htm • • • To Learn more about Rabbi Klenicki's subversion of Sacred Scripture (a workshop that took place at a "Catholic" seminary), go to www.cfnews.org/klen.htm
| ||
|
|
