​senator machaela cavanaugh and "hate"

​Dear Friends,

Just thought I’d share the letter I just sent to every member of the Legislature. In addition, I sent it to the Governor, the AG and the SoS. I leave you with it. -Bob

Dear Senators,

Here is my response​ to ​​Senator Machaela ​​Cavanaugh,​ her​ witches coven, their Don't Legislate Hate PAC and their ​Democrat/RINO ​sympathizers in our Legislature:

Cavanaugh claims she's ​"​standing up against hate.”
https://twitter.com/senatormachaela/status/1646639177759326209?s=20

​She​ completely begs the question​:​​ Is hate necessarily a bad thing??

In the sacred text of a worldview different from hers, hate is a GOOD thing:

"The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate."

With regard to gender identity, however a person may feel about their identity, one thing remains evident:

demanding the right to one's own worldview is not in conformity with demanding that all others alter theirs to agree.

It's self-refuting.

If you will not accept the choices of others, why should they accept yours?

No one gets to adjudicate reality for everyone.

This is intolerance of personal agency masquerading as tolerance.

The most we can ask for is a right to make our case.

No one gets to demand that anyone else agree.

We're not talking about slavery here or larceny. 

It's not an infringement of the right to self-determination, the sanctity of one's person, or a right to property (unless we're talking about the property of others—more on that point below).

It's words. 

It's opinion.

And everyone gets to have one or no one does.

The kinds of positive rights structures (advocated by Dylan Mulvaney in his tweet below) that would entitle me to mandate by law that everyone only describe the world as I see fit do not create a world any compos mentis person should want to live in.
https://twitter.com/TheFirstonTV/status/1651749841263894529

Equating that with "tolerance" is a shabby oratorical trick.

Property rights: ​Cavanaugh​ and ​the gender identity community also beg the question of entitlement to the coffers of others​, to support​ ​their worldview​. I toil and work and earn "bread," and they "eat" it, or, they take it and sell it to support their lifestyle.

Empowering government, the only agency with a monopoly on legal violence to enforce its decree, to use legislative and executive force to oppose freedom of expression and opinion, is to reign in an Orwellian world of "thought crimes" and "thought police." Our only entitlements as a matter of existence are our natural rights: life, liberty, and property. And the cornerstone role of government is the protection and defense of those natural rights, not social engineering or the enforcement of one worldview over another.

With regard to "abortion," aka terminating the life of an innocent preborn baby for the sake of casual birth control, the question is one of public sanction and conscience. 

Should the public be forced to sanction (approve) and support such activity? 

If you think so, back up and read the above again. 

As far as the sacred text goes, the answer is no. The babe leaped in Elisabeth's womb for joy. 

The casual taking of innocent life is murder and​ murder is​ evil.​ Nations that support such evil fall into many other foolish and hurtful lusts which ultimately drown it in destruction and perdition.

Ultimately, a woman can take her baby's life without anyone knowing about it. It can be done in the privacy of one's home with "medications." Going to a "doctor" to have the baby sliced and diced or suctioned apart, and his or her body parts sold for medical research is not necessary for termination of the child.

The fact this is even a debate in our Legislature is a function of a total lack of integrity in our elections. We have selected representatives, not elected ones.

​Robert J. Borer​

P.S. The vast majority of woman who murder their baby suffer serious mental illness. Sin has consequences. It injures the soul.

​​