Clinton's War on Hate Bans Christian Values

"Hate speech" and "hate crime" as legal categories usher in the concept of political crime - as un-American a proposition as there can be. America's survival depends on the unequivocal rejection of political crime.

Balint Vazsonyi, who survived Nazi and Communist dictatorships in Hungary

Today's anti-hate rhetoric is the latest in a series of politically correct claimants to American morality that began when America abandoned its Biblical rootsin search for more tolerable moral substitutes.

On the face of it, the consensus that "hate" is bad seems "good"-and it's easy to rally people around the concept of "responding to hate," especially if your community is plagued by extremist groups with an overtly hateful, violent agenda. However, once the concept of hating hate has been legitimized as a public virtue, it triggers a process lethal to freedom of speech, thought and religion.

In order to "respond to hate," someone has to define who the haters are. This is done by publicly categorizing hateful beliefs and attitudes. From that point, the whole process degenerates into political correctness, which is often hostile to Christian beliefs.

Formalizing the War on Hate

"Under Attorney General Reno's leadership, the Justice Department has taken aim at hate crimes with more prosecutions and tougher punishments," announced President Clinton during the White House Conference on Hate Crimes on November 10, 1997. "The National Hate-Crimes Network will marshal the resources of federal, state and local enforcement, community groups, educators, and antiviolence advocates...."

To end the long-touted cultural division in the United States, every citizen would have to be brought into a "national dialogue" to build a new "consensus." Values that clashed with the new ethic of tolerance would be branded hateful and intolerant. The program would be marketed to the public by publicizing genuine hateful acts such as the murder of homosexuals,¹ but in practice "hate" would include any attitude that opposes the new ideology.

To end cultural and religious division, President Clinton proposed starting "some sort of club or organization at the school-because if you think about it, your parents are still pretty well separated. Most neighborhoods are still fairly segregated. Most houses of worship are still fairly segregated... We have to find a disciplined, organized way out of this so that we reach every child before something bad happens...."

Could the President be suggesting that Christian parents be pressured to conform to the world's standards? Or that churches be forced to blend their worship with those who choose other gods and contrary life-styles?

Might our government mandate "voluntary"² youth groups-as did Nazi and Communist rulers determined to mold compliant citizens - so that cultural "separation" won't cause "something bad to happen?" This idea would seem absurd if this administration's rhetoric didn't seem to support it.

The Sin of Separateness

"Seeing ourselves as separate is the central problem in our political thinking,"³ said then-Senator Al Gore at a 1991 Communitarian conference in Washington, D.C. He was quoted in the book, Spiritual Politics, co-authored by Corinne McLaughlin, a follower of Dhjwal Khul, the spirit-guide channeled by occultist Alice Bailey. McLaughlin was the first Task Force Coordinator for President Clinton's Council for Sustainable Development⁴ and taught occult meditation at the Department of Education, the Pentagon, and the EPA.⁵

"There really is only one sin-separateness," she states in her book. "War is more likely to spring from rampant nationalism, ethnocentrism, and intolerant religious fundamentalism - all extreme and separative attitudes."

Her solution matches President Clinton's message at the Hate-Crimes Conference: "What is needed as a cure for separateness is a deep sense of community-that we're all in this together."

Top-Down Morality

The blueprint for the new community comes straight from the United Nations, through countless UN-affiliated governmental and nongovernmental networks-all working together to turn your town into a 21st century "sustainable community."⁶ The "partners" implementing this vision include the school (that's the hub), government, media, business, NGOs (feminists, environmentalists), health centers, day-care centers, Chambers of Commerce, churches, and finally parents-but only those who conform to the process.

Training Politically Correct Parents

"Fundamental attitudes are formed during the first four or five years of life, states the 1983 UNESCO plan for Lifelong Learning. "Preschool educators have a special responsibility to ensure that a child's first experience outside the home is one in which he learns to share, cooperate, and function in a group. Parents and preschool educators should teach children to resolve their conflicts peacefully." Stereotyping may "reinforce rigid social attitudes."⁷

God's family is made up of people from "every tribe and nation." But Clinton's war on hate has also targeted Biblical Christianity for its refusal to "respect, accept and appreciate" gay life-styles. The "rigid attitudes" include Biblical absolutes.

As far back as 1946, this anti-Biblical bias was evident, reflected in a statement by Dr. Brock Chisholm, former head of the World Health Organization:

We have swallowed all manner of poisonous certainties fed us by our parents. The results are frustration, inferiority, neurosis and inability to...make the world fit to live in.

It has long been generally accepted that parents have a perfect right to impose any points of view, any lies or fears, superstitions, prejudices, hates, or faith on their defenseless children. [People with] guilts, fears, inferiorities, are certain to project their hates on to others...Such reaction now becomes a dangerous threat to the whole world....⁸

Two years later, the International Congress on Mental Health met in London, where it presented a report entitled Mental Health and World Citizenship.

It included this statement:

"Social institutions such as family and school impose their imprint early...Thus prejudice, hostility or excessive nationalism may become deeply embedded in the developing personality, often at great human cost. Change will be strongly resisted unless an attitude of acceptance has first been engendered.

Now, fifty years later, after an intense media blitz promoting state control over early childhood education, that "attitude of acceptance" has almost been engendered. During the April 1997 White House Conference on America's Future, movie star Tom Hanks moderated a film entitled "I Am Your Child." During his introduction he said:

"The emotional and intellectual environment [the child] is exposed to during those critical first three years will have a profound effect on what kind of person he will turn out to be. And the kind of person he turns out to be will impact, either positively or negatively, every other person in the world.

It's sobering that politically incorrect child-raising could be such a threat to the entire world. No wonder our government now claims a "compelling interest" in telling you how to train your child.

Echoing these sentiments during his Hate-Crimes Conference, President Clinton implied that traditional parents may teach innocent children to hate. "Children have to be taught to hate," he said. "We need to make sure that somebody is teaching them not to do so. The most important thing we can do is to reach these kids while they're young enough to learn...If we all do our part for that, we can make America one nation under God."

Countering Christian "Intolerance"

To enforce these unconstitutional ideals, President Clinton called on the Departments of Education and Justice to "distribute to every school district in the country a "hate crimes resource guide," which would "direct educators to the materials they can use to teach tolerance and mutual respect."

The word "tolerance" has recently been given a specific new meaning with global significance and authority. UNESCO's Declaration on Tolerance⁹ defines it as "respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our world's cultures." It is not only a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement. "Intolerance is a global threat." Therefore, it calls for:

* "...the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism." (Such as the Bible?)

* "...analysis of root causes and effective countermeasures, as well as monitoring."

* "...tolerance teaching methods that will address the cultural and religious sources of intolerance."

Addressing "religious sources of intolerance" must involve everyone. As President Clinton said last November, "All of us have to do more in our communities and in our homes and places of worship to teach all of our children about the dignity of every person."

That means that Christian parents and pastors must be trained in politically correct child-raising-a major reason for the 1996 contract between the U.S. Department of Education and the mainline denominations. Drawing church leaders into the process is key to their success.

Monitoring Compliance

Classroom discussion groups that prompt children to criticize their parents help monitor resistance. So does a profusion of intrusive surveys that tell children to report family attitudes, church attendance, and all kinds of other private matters.

Much of this data has already become part of the student's personal computerized file. And the new Career and School-to-Work legislation will intensify and nationalize the tracking process.¹⁰

Soon, when each child is linked to his or her individual computer program, the gathering of this private information can be accelerated and controlled. Then, as Dustin Heuston from the World Institute for Computer-Assisted Teaching predicted, "No one can get between that child and that computer."¹¹

According to Clinton, this monitoring process would be linked to the federal government. "The Justice Department will make its own hate crimes training curriculum available," he said at the above conference. "Hate crimes still go unreported. If a crime is unreported, that gives people an excuse to ignore it." In other words, ignoring a neighbor's incorrect attitudes would not be an option.

The pressure to report resistance to the new solidarity fits the concept of "civil society" promoted by both President and Hillary Clinton. Also called "participatory democracy," it requires each person to serve the community, participate in group discussions, and take responsibility for establishing common values-especially social unity and equality.

To reinforce the process, Clinton invoked the authority of Attorney General Janet Reno. "The Justice Department is launching a web site," he announced, "where younger students can learn about prejudice and the harm it causes."

To access this web site, go to the "Department of Justice Kid's Page" at http://www.usdoj.gov/kidspage/bias-k-5/. There, Janet Reno invites you to "help stop hateful acts that hurt kids just like you" in the home, school, playground or neighborhood. If a relative in your home makes any derogatory comment, you are invited to correct the relative and/or discuss the problem with a trusted adult.

This kind of interrogation has become a daily ritual in elementary schools across the country. When children are linked to their personal computer programs, such intrusive questions will become interactive dialogues between students and computers programmed to choose the right questions, measure the degree of resistance, and monitor rates of change. The answers will be fed into the national/international data tracking system, already established.

If the educational establishment has its way, parents and all others will be included as well. No one will be free from the watchful eye of the state.

Yet, in the midst of this battle for freedom, our God reigns! While a spiritual war rages around us, He promises strength and wisdom to those who follow Him and refuse to compromise. "Blessed are all who put their trust in Him."

For more information about "lifelong" training in the new global values, read Brave New Schools and A Twist of Faith by Berit Kjos.

1. These crimes are already prosecuted under existing statues, so there is no need for additional legislation.
2. The word "voluntary" has become a euphemism to win support for all kinds of intrusive regulations that soon become mandatory.
3. Corinne McLaughlin and Gordon Davidson, Spiritual Politics, Ballantine Books, New York, 1994, p. 147.
4. See "Local Agenda 21" at Berit's web site.
5. McLaughlin listed her experiences while conducting a workshop attended by Berit Kjos during a 50th anniversary celebration for the United Nations titled "Celebrating the Spirit" at the University of California at Berkeley, June 19-21, 1995.
6. Ibid.
7. Education for International Cooperation and Peace at the Primary-School Level, UNESCO, 1983 (Printed in Switzerland).
8. G.B. Chisholm, "The Reestablishment of a Peacetime Society," Psychiatry, February 1946, pp. 7, 9-10, 16, 18.
9. Ibid.
10. Dustin H. Heuston, "Discussion-Developing the Potential of an Amazing Tool," Schooling and Technology, Vol. 3, Planning for the Future: A Collaborative Model (Southeastern Regional Council for Educational Improvement), p. 8.