Sponsor a Boerchild

Growing concern is induced by unilateral ANC/Communist legislation which is being forced upon those who wish to maintain their own cultural and historical heritage. It is clear that the present foreign rulers are acting with increasing hostility towards Boere-Afrikaners. Initially, an image of reconciliation towards all and sundry was projected. Now, their true colours of impatience and apprehension with anybody who refuse support to their so-called transformation process, which is intended to give rise to a rainbow nation without identity, are showing. Consequently, a growing number of responsible people from all walks of life are asking themselves whether God-fearing people should obey such a regime. A regime which so clearly tries to oppress the Christian community. The question is also raised whether such tyrannical abuse of power should be opposed, by whom and how. The principles of the reformed Biblical perspective are very clear as far as violent revolution is concerned. The rejection of the Bible as the highest norm and the elevation of human reason and its high-handedness are sure signs of disbelief. The chaos following any revolution usually also devours the children of the revolution.

A few articles is attached to describe what the current government is doing to influence a child to ensure a new order according to their standards:

UNCHRISTIAN TOLERANCE
THE DEATH OF A DREAM OF CARING
THE RIGHT OF INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION

Boer.co.za and Rescue Action for Own Education has established a fund with the aim of reaching out to Boer children and other Christians to raise funds to ensure that children whose parents cannot afford the education they want to give to their children.

Several children has been selected for sponsorship.

Work in two ways

1) Select a child out. According to the amount a two monthly report is given to the sponsor in writing on the procress of the child

2) or given a amount on time or regular amount which is given on the discretion

1) UNCHRISTIAN TOLERANCE
Curriculum 2005 is being phased into government schools systematically, irrespective of serious objections and problems which are pointed out by responsible educationalists. Objections about the lack of proper textbooks and especially the lack of necessary training by teachers, who have to implement the system, is ignored. The same is done when doubts are raised whether the majority of pupils have the self-motivation and brainpower which the system requires. The fact that outcome directed education could lead to schools delivering uneducated matriculants, who have not been tested by exams, on the employment market is not accepted as an argument. Precisely the fact that the government is going on with the implementation of Curriculum 2005 in spite of objections and doubts, confirms the suspicion that it is all about an ideology and not about educational principles. Ideology will never be prescribed by reason. Curriculum 2005 is just another instrument in the process of forcing down, what professor AFG. Raath has called, ideological pluralism. The Christian faith is continuously being run down as something with only relative value, he says. He sees the implication of this kind of education as destructive for Christian children. To describe the demands of this ideology as unchristian tolerance, could at first glance be seen as inherently contradictory terminology, or a contradiction in terms. Christ himself has indeed told us to be tolerant and it is emphasised more than once in the letters of the apostles. This way of thinking however, demands a kind of tolerance from Christians that goes totally against the Christian doctrine. It asks Christians to concede that our faith is not the only and absolute truth. It demands the kind of tolerance which admits that all faiths are equal. Its viewpoint is that the solidarity of humanity is the highest commodity . Religious differences have to bow before the ideal of humanism and the human rights doctrine. This is how the Christian faith has to be democratized.

In practice this theology is already forced on schools, even on former model C schools. An Afrikaans school was forced a few years ago to allow a Muslim boy to have a beard and to accommodate his religion. Afrikaans schools are not only being forced to become blacker and Anglicised, it is being made very difficult for them to continue giving children a value driven education which is based on Christian principles. The Christian faith in schools has to be made at least equal to other faiths, which in many cases are intolerant and extremist like Hinduism, Mohammedanism and traditional African religions. In practice it comes down to religious education like we know it, becoming impossible and unacceptable. Indications are that Curriculum 2005 will introduce religious education in the end, but only on the basis of all religions being equal and only relatively true. The unchristian tolerance which is being demanded from Christians, also goes hand in hand with an ideological and political intolerance against them. Professor Raath stated the following:

“The maintenance of the ideological pluralism is pursued as an important model for the up-keep of general well-being. Christian parents are canvassed relentlessly to accept as dogmatic and sectional to want to stay devoted to the infallible truth of a single Christian philosophy of life.” Seen against this, the regaining of our freedom is not only a determining factor for our People’s survival, but even for our salvation as Christians as well.

2) THE DEATH OF A DREAM OF CARING
On Wednesday 9 February there was a single column report somewhere in the middle of a newspaper about the eco centre at Glenmore which was to be closed down. People who are uninformed probably did not realise that this announcement sounded the death ring of a ten-year-old little girl’s dream of caring for underprivileged Afrikaner children. We have to thank this little girl for the centre, now described as an eco centre in Kwa-Zulu-Natal. The year 1936 was a terribly dry year and especially Afrikaners who lived in the Bushveld were suffering terribly. The scenario was that of barefoot children, patched clothes and mielie porridge and bitter coffee three times a day. Just before Christmas a newspaper, Die Vaderland, received a letter in reaction to a series of articles about the drought and poverty among Afrikaners in the Bushveld. In the envelope was a ten-shilling note, the equivalent of the present Rand, pinned on a request in a child’s handwriting that it should be used to buy a Christmas gift for a poor Afrikaner child. The publication of this letter resulted in veld fire of compassion. Readers from all over the country sent money for Christmas gifts for the poor Bushveld children. The result was that a Vaderland car full of gifts and delicacies for the little Bushveld inhabitants departed from Johannesburg a few days before Christmas 1936. The big excitement and deep gratitude this visit by Father Christmas from Johannesburg caused, was reward enough for the donators, the newspaper wrote. It was the start of a regular yearly Christmas fund. In 1937 it was the turn of the Winburg orphans to receive a visit from Father Christmas. Under the motto We Serve The Child, Die Vaderland’s Voortrekker Seaside Fund was established. Its mission was: “To provide an opportunity for the children of impoverished parents to enjoy a holiday at the seaside”. The action accelerated in momentum until a piece of land was bought at Glenmore Beach and eventually a fine building complex was erected on it. Since then about 5-thousand children of needy parents have gone to the seaside. The Childrens’ Beach was equipped with educational facilities as well, so the children would not fall behind during the full term they visited the beach. Die Vaderland ‘s Childrens’ Beach became an Afrikaner landmark. It was the realisation of a ten-year-old girl’s dream to reach out to her underprivileged fellow Afrikaner children. We are certain that some of Radio Pretoria’s listeners also have some wonderful memories of a seaside holiday at the Children’s Beach. Now, it seems this has come to an end. In fact the former Children’s Beach complex has for a long time not been what it was supposed to be. A lack of funds and a government which does not care one bit for Afrikaner landmarks has caught up with the Children’s Beach. Still, we wonder if there isn’t a privileged Afrikaner institution somewhere, which could buy it and restore it to an Afrikaner institution. Does that little girl not exist somewhere today?

3) THE RIGHT OF INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION
Although Thabo Mbeki tries to ignore the increasing insistence on group rights in Afrikaner circles, it will keep on growing. In the end, we believe local impetus and foreign pressure will force the ANC/SACP regime to take note of the matter. We are conducting a rightful struggle for the recognition of rights which according to international interpretation we rightfully deserve. We do not ask for favours. In order to be more effective, it is necessary to explain the implications those rights have for ourselves as well as others.

An essential right of People or ethnic groups is the right to exclude in order to be able to maintain identity, language, culture and religion. The Constitution is very strong on the right to include. In its policy and actions the government makes use of this principle on every terrain of society. It is also enforced by legislation. The so-called Equality Bill, the Schools Bill and the Bill on Equitable Employment are characteristic examples. These laws make inclusion and thus integration compulsory. So much so that it becomes impossible, especially for Afrikaners to live up to that part of the Constitution, which guarantees them the right to promote and maintain their own language, education, culture and even religion. Take for example the case of a white Afrikaans school. It is forced to accommodate children of other and more numerous ethnic groups, who have other language preferences, other values and other religions. No child may be refused entry on the basis of race, colour, religion, language and even financial means. The right of inclusion is all-embracing. What happens is inevitable. Those schools lose their Afrikaans identity, their language, culture, - everything. The fact is that schools like these and the Afrikaans community it wants to serve, do not have the right to exclude children who do not fit in with their cultural identity. It effectively takes away their right to maintain their own. It also deprives the Afrikaner child and every child of other ethnic groups from the basic right to be educated in the language of his choice. One could even argue that it effectively deprives a child from its right to have a nationality, as described in clause 28, by forcing him into a rainbow situation through the educational system.

The same is true for the employer. He is forced by the right of inclusion to change his staff component according to a preconceived program in order to reflect the precise ratios of the different racial groups in the entire population.
This effectively eliminates clause 27 (1) and (3). It goes against all equitable labour practices and against the right of an employer to run his business in the most profitable manner. It also applies to residential areas, clubs, private organisations, churches and so forth. A group can only maintain and live up to its culture and identity if it has the right to exclude those elements which do not fit in. That right has been taken away from the Afrikaner and he will have to reconquer it if he does not want to become part of an amorphous rainbow nation. The right to exclude does not mean domination or doing injustice to others. It just incorporates the right to keep and maintain that which is your own.