Vancouver resident Leah Anaya urges area citizens to let their legislators know how they feel about the bill that would form a ‘domestic violence extremism’ commission
Washington state will potentially be forming a “domestic violence extremism” commission should Democrat-sponsored House Bill 1333 pass this legislative session. What does that mean? Well, to sum up, it means that the outward expression of your values as a Christian will become illegal in the state of Washington. The federal government attempted to form a similar task force but for some reason the project has been put on hold (perhaps they realized there was no way something like this could hold up to the Constitution?). But never fear, Communist lovers, our legislature has come to the rescue to push their own version.
Of course we all want actual terrorism, extremism, and violence to be extinguished, but that’s not what the bill is about, no matter how pretty advocates for it try to dress it up. The bill is intentionally vague so that it can be applied liberally (pun intended) however the powers that be (or, the radical left in our state) see fit.
If you believe in the scientific evidence of two genders in the biological makeup of the human race, you’re hateful, bigoted, and transphobic. If you believe in the sanctity of life and that said life begins at conception, you’re hateful, bigoted, anti-woman, and pro-slavery. If you believe that all men are created equal and should be treated as such (to include – gasp – white people), then you’re hateful, bigoted, racist, and a white supremacist. Even if you’re not white.
Aside from multiple politicians, the commission will be made up of representatives from many different “communities,” identified by race, religion, and sexual creed. One likely need not think too hard about what race, religion, and sexual creeds are left out of the equation (but just in case there’s any question, there are no white, Christian, heterosexuals listed as entitled to representation). Is this not the very thing people on all sides of the political aisle are fighting against? Is this not racist, religious and heterosexual segregation? There is a specific position reserved for a person who identifies as Muslim and Jewish, but not Christian. There is a specific position reserved for a person who identifies as black, Hispanic, Asian, and Sikh, but not white. There’s a specific position reserved for a person who identifies as LGBTQ, but not heterosexual.
Should the group of representatives not be inclusive of ALL of the aforementioned, not just a select group who are viewed as victims of oppression? It’s insulting to many of the members of the “communities” listed above that they’re automatically assumed to be of such little value, strength, and societal contributions that they are put into this category. How dare the legislature assume that someone is a victim or oppressed or worthless without help from the government simply because they’re Muslim or gay or black?
Further, as Christians, many have been the victim of extreme discrimination and violence of late because of their faith doctrine. Pregnancy centers that are based around their belief in the Biblical values of loving and assisting those in need have been attacked in our very communities because they’re not trying to convince every minority mother that walks into their center to kill the human life growing inside of them. Extremists have shown up to Christian concerts with the intent of disrupting the event because they’re praising a God who loves all and has laid out Biblical truths for His children. White people have been made out to be evil, even the children who have no idea what oppression even means. Do these people not deserve to have representation against discrimination?
Of course not, according to the radical left.
Further, the commission would be tasked with “Identifying community-led and evidence-based solutions to combat disinformation and misinformation, address early signs of radicalization, and develop public health-style responses.” Misinformation according to whom? If we look at the recent pandemic, those who dared to question the information published by the media were called science-deniers, alt-right extremists, and, of course, hateful and bigoted. Questions are a valuable part of the scientific method and, under normal circumstances, are actually encouraged so that we may learn more about a specific topic. But not this specific topic. For this one, we must all sit down and shut up and do what the government tells us to do. Does that really make those who ask questions radicals or extremists?
Interestingly, there’s no mention of radicalization being akin to tactics such as shutting down whole city blocks for a “protest” that is clearly defined as a riot, to include vandalization and looting of businesses, burning of private and public property, and physical attacks on police officers. Of course, that’s not the tactics used by Christians, but rather those who claim to fight for “social justice” but in fact do nothing but further the racial divide, among other things. In fact, these methods were even encouraged by far-left politicians! Is that not domestic violence and extremism?
It’s not well disguised that this bill and potential commission is a blatant attack on conservatism, Christianity, and those who dare to be born white. That is itself a version of its own extremism, which is ironic as this bill claims to want to work against that. Regardless, this is not the time to stay silent or sit back and watch what happens. This is the time to speak up, and not just on social media. Readers are encouraged to email their own political representatives, but even more, reach out to the committee in the Washington State House of Representatives who will hear public comment on this bill today (Feb. 13).
Please click here to make your CON position known for this bill, or click here to submit written comment against the bill (both must be done by 3 p.m. Monday, 2/13). Now is the time to stand up. Perhaps you were made for such a time as this.
Also read:
- POLL: How would you rate the accessibility of Vancouver city officials for addressing community concerns?How accessible are Vancouver city officials to community concerns?
- Opinion: New audit offers another reason lawmakers should leave the state’s paid-leave program behindElizabeth New (Hovde) critiques Washington’s Paid Family and Medical Leave program, highlighting audit findings of double-dipping and program inefficiencies.
- Opinion: WA turns redder, despite faulty media reports that said otherwiseWAGOP highlights gains in Washington’s November 2024 election, challenging claims the state turned “bluer.”
- Opinion: New FCC Chairman indicates shakeup for internet policyFCC Chairman Brendan Carr signals major shifts in internet policy, from net neutrality to rural broadband and tech regulations.
- Opinion: John Ley pens letter to Transportation Secretary Pete ButtigiegJohn Ley challenges the I-5 Bridge Replacement project, urging Secretary Pete Buttigieg to reconsider federal funding.