First of all, for those of you who do not know me, I am David Hunnicutt, a long time resident of this county, a landholder, and a veteran of the US Army, a taxpayer and a friend of the Court.  I would like to thank the court for granting me an audience, and sincerely am honored that members of this court seek my advice and counsel.  It is a great honor to be able to serve and help the people of our community in any way that I can.

The 1^st Amendment to the Constitution grants and secures the American people in that their right to peacefully assemble shall not be infringed nor shall they be deprived thereof.  The Supreme Court of these United States has ruled that said right encompasses, but is not limited to, the right to assemble for religious purposes without fear of reprisal or persecution.  It does not however, grant the freedom to worship and partake in practices which we as a society have deemed cruel or inhumane based purely upon religious beliefs contrived from another society’s point of view, or a doctrine derived from someone else’s guidelines which they may consider to be divine in origin or having come from a person who some may revere as a prophet.

There is no one in this county who is more supportive of the rights of the individual, or of the free market than am I.  As a soldier, I offered my very life, even placed it on the line for those rights; however, I cannot condone nor justify acts which violate the rights of others, inasmuch as I believe one persons rights end where the next persons rights begin.

In these United States, we as a people, do not promote nor condone animal cruelty.  Indeed, we have laws which penalize such activities as Cock fighting, Dog fighting, Bull fighting, etc.  The USDA has determined, in conjunction with legal precedence, that the slaughtering of livestock for the sake of human consumption in large quantities (though by necessity an unpleasant deed) must be done in as humane a manner as is conceivable possible.  At present, the standing methodology is the use of electrical impulse to stop both the heart and brain activity at the speed of light.  This manner within itself may be found objectionable by some in our society; however, the degree of cruelty is very limited.

The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) advised both the Government of the United Kingdom and these United States of America, that the ritual slaughter process of killing animals reared for meat using a method known as “Zibah” under Sharia/Muslim Law, should be outlawed; based upon its unsanitary and inhumane techniques. The “Zibah” method involves praying over the animal while it is restrained, slitting its throat, and allowing the animal to die slowly as the blood leaves its body.  Anyone who has ever witnessed this “Bleeding out” method can testify to its inherent cruelty, as the animal screams and suffers, and often drowns on its own blood.  To prevent the blood from entering the animals lungs, it must be strung up by its hind legs, while fully conscious, it’s head dangling downward, and its throat then slit open … a miserable way to die.  Someone deeming it “holy” does not take away the cruelty therein involved.

Some members of our society have been offended by these recommendations to outlaw this killing technique; however, we are not as a nation subject to be obliged to change our way of life or sacrifice our rule of law because of the opinion of members of a religious faith who wish to not partake in our societies rules of governance may be offended by American law or way of life.  To appease these persons for the sake of political correctness, out of fear of reprisal from their anger for violating their version of the law, or for monetary favors granted to political office holders, would be a disgrace to all who have worn a uniform to protect and defend the very Constitution which provides these persons the right to be offended.  I, having worn that uniform, will not yield our nations governance out of cowardice, nor in favor of political correctness. 

What is being proposed in our community, is the building and development of a facility for the slaughtering of livestock under the auspices of a “small operation”, yet research is showing that the intent is to slaughter as many as 15 head of grass fed cattle a day which would be grown and maintained on a 200 acre parcel of land.  These cattle would then be slaughtered through the antiquated and even barbaric concept of “throat slitting”. Thus, it is in compliance with Sharia Law.

Let me remind the Commissioners’ Court of a statement made by Patrick Henry, one of our nation’s revered founding fathers.  He stated to the colonial congress, “Gentlemen, let us not forget, this nation was not founded upon freedom of religion; this nation was founded upon a belief in Jesus Christ.”

For the edification of the Commissioners’ Court, I offer these “commandments” of this “Sharia” law, which by granting permission for an “Halal” slaughterhouse, we are inferably being asked to condone and accept, for in accepting one part of Sharia law, would we then in reality not be expected to accept others?  And exactly where does it stop?  These “commandments” also came from this man, Muhammad, and the Quran, thus “Sharia Law”:

1.       commands that drinkers and gamblers should be whipped

2.       allows husbands to hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear highhandedness in their wives

3.       allows an injured plaintiff to exact legal revenge—physical eye for physical eye

4.       commands that a male and female thief must have a hand cut off

5.       commands that highway robbers should be crucified and mutilated

6.    commands that homosexuals must be executed

7.    orders unmarried fornicators to be whipped and adulterers to be stoned to death

8.    orders death for Muslim and possible death for non—Muslim critics of Muhammad and the Quran and even sharia itself

9.    orders apostates to be killed

10.  commands offensive, aggressive and unjust jihad against all infidels (and let me remind you that on Sept. 11, 2001 – Sharia Law and radical Islam declared Jihad upon our nation, and at present over 5000 American men and women in uniform have died because of that Jihad! Not to mention the lives lost in the attack on the World Trade Centers in New York!)

There are other forms of religious activities that our society does not condone, lest anyone should say that I am being prejudiced against Islamist, for I am not.  Wicken is a form of paganism, which according to its followers is the oldest religion and these followers worship a dual God. It is both a god and goddess. The practice of human and animal sacrifice is condoned and promoted by “Wickens “or “Wicca”. Even though “Wicca” is an accepted and recognized religion in these United States … We as a society have deemed these practices unacceptable and cruel and thus have prohibited them. 

We do not, nor should we prohibit any person from holding their own religious beliefs; however, just for the mere sake of “political correctness”, we should not allow “believers” to partake in practices which violate the rule of our nation’s law.  At present, we, as a free Republic, base our legal system upon the teachings of the bible and the Constitution with its attached Bill of Rights, not upon the United Nations’ Guidelines, not upon the beliefs of the Wickens, nor is our legal system and societal governance based upon the Quran and “hadith”.  We govern ourselves by American Law, not Sharia Law. 

I hold title to approximately 1000 acres of land here in our county.  On that property we raise cattle.  At best, if the Texas weather cooperates, we are able to support about 1 animal per 5 acres of land. With 4 Bulls and 200 Cows, at a 75% effective annual breeding cycle, we are able to calve about 150 head a year.  Remember, that is on 1000 acres.  By grass feeding, without supplementation, these registered Angus cattle will gain approximately 2 lbs per day, thus at yearling age, we could in theory, slaughter 150, 7-800 pound yearlings annually, or about 3 head every week.  The point is; it is not possible to produce 10-15 head of slaughter size cattle per day on 200 acres of even the most prime grazing land in existence.

Thus, I contend that the truth behind this matter is that this proposed facility will be the point of slaughter for livestock being shipped in daily or weekly, having been raised elsewhere.  .  In our county, we do not; to my knowledge, have any “halal” certified raisers of livestock capable of producing 4000 plus head of slaughterable cattle per year—the amount which 10-15 head a day adds up to. Inasmuch as our county would have little to no knowledge of the origin of the livestock being shipped in, the risk of bringing unwanted and undesirable infected livestock into our agricultural areas would greatly increase, if not by intent, but by mere chance and inadvertence.

Next December, one year from now, the National Animal Identification System, will be implemented.  This may provide the ability to track and maintain point of origin information on livestock and restrict, if not alleviate, the threat of potential infestations; however, at present that technology has not been implemented.  My question again, where will the animals be shipped in from? And where would the 1 – 2 MILLION POUNDS of “Halal” certified beef products be shipped to? 

The location of this facility is in unincorporated Ellis County, as is my ranch.  I believe firmly that I should have, as well as other land holders, the right to do as I please upon my property, as long as I stay within the boundaries of the rule of American law, and do not partake in activities which should cause undue harm or burden to my neighbors, or my fellow man.  The access roads to this proposed facility are not designed for commercial use. I have offered to do maintenance on the poorly maintained county roads at my ranch, but have been told that it would not be allowed.   I would suggest that the court consider this, and if indeed this court should approve this requested business endeavor, that it also demand that the profiteers of the facility be required to facilitate appropriate road ways, by Texas Department of Transportation standards, for said commercial activities, as such cost would likely be in the millions of dollars. But then that would not be allowed could it? As I was told that I could not maintain my county roads, yet if I want to divide my ranch the Commissioners Court would command me to build roads better than I-45 while they provide me with dirt road access??? Therefore, I must assume that the taxpayers in this county would be obliged to pay for the upgrading of roadage to a controversial facility which our county does not need.  I will not stand by quietly and allow my tax dollars to be spent for the facilitation of a business which violates the ethical, moral, and legal guidelines set forth by the United States of America, the United Stated Department of Agriculture, and the basic rule of American law and the great State of Texas.

I understand that the line between individual rights and the good of society is often obscure … this is such a case.  Through unjust political correctness and a “what is good for the many outweighs the rights of the one” philosophy, we are rapidly approaching becoming a socialist nation, and subjecting ourselves to the certain loss of our free Republic.

For instance, I used the term “land holder” as opposed to landowner for the fact that I am aware that if I should fail to pay the taxes levied upon my property arbitrarily by entities of governance which I do not condone nor see as just, within time, men with guns would arrive on my property and attempt to separate me from what is by natural law, mine. 

I cannot justify this; however, it is the rule of law by which I must abide.  If I, as one who has honorably served my nation, who has stood up to those who wish to impose harm upon the American people, one who has shed his blood, sweat and tears for his country, must abide by the rule of law, parts of which I deem unjust- then, I ask, is it too much to demand that others who have given nothing of themselves to my country, and wish only to use my country for their own personal gain by exploitation, to abide by those rules as well?

At the whim of a governing agency, my natural law, God given and constitutionally assured rights to life, liberty and property may be taken from me without just cause; yet, I am asked to accept and condone another society’s “laws” for fear of violating rights which they do not even believe in?

This case at hand, in my opinion, is not one in which we risk violation of individual rights.  I contend that this is a case where we risk compromising the very basis of our free Republic and American rule of law.

Is it too much to ask that the people of our community not be subjected to the rule of a barbaric governing system in the name of political correctness, or through a bastardization of the intent of our founding fathers, and an inappropriate interpretation of the Bill of Rights? Even be asked to pay for maintaining the roadage, or improving such for this “Halal” slaughterhouse.

I am not, nor do I wish to condemn or defame anyone for their personal religious beliefs; however, in 2004, these same “Sharia” laws caused the following, and I quote from Amnesty International, and the Associated Press: This was not a random case, nor an act by “Islamic extremists”, but a common occurrence done in a state (Iran)  which lives by, condones and promotes “Sharia” law.

“An Iranian woman charged with adultery faces death by stoning in the next five days after her death sentence was upheld by the Supreme Court last month. Her unnamed co—defendant is at risk of imminent execution by hanging. Amnesty International members are now writing urgent appeals to the Iranian authorities, calling for the execution to be stopped. 
She is to be buried up to her chest and stoned to death.”

This gruesome “hadith” (Hadith is a collection of writings and actions of Muhammad not recorded in the Quran) passage reports that a woman was buried up to her chest and stoned to death:

“And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al—Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on his face he cursed her” . . . (Muslim no. 4206)

The course appears to be clear. At all levels of government, we are witnessing the deterioration of our Republic.  Economically, sociologically, politically, theologically~ our great Republic  is rapidly becoming a place where our failure to stand for what our nation was founded upon, that being a belief in Jesus Christ, has undermined our way of life, and threatens not just our freedom, but our very lives themselves. 

The question is simple.  Are we living in the free Republic which we profess, or are we merely cowering down to the demands of outside influences who wish to change our way of life by forcing us, through misconstruing of our laws, to accept their laws and way of life?  Do we stand for what we believe in, or do we allow others to take from us our freedom to not condone activities we deem unjust and unfit, so that they may pursue that course which they have chosen and proclaimed as holy.

I believe it is our duty as Christians, and as leaders in our community, to stand by our beliefs, our convictions and our Constitution, even if others find that stance offensive, and protect and defend our Constitution against its enemies, both foreign and domestic, as we have sworn before God and upon the words of his son Jesus Christ to do.

This Court has in the not too distant past, denied a request from a gentleman on Hwy. 157 the right to slaughter goats by modern techniques to provide a much in demand meat supply for our local, and sizeable Hispanic community; Inasmuch as this Court has denied an Hispanic family from being able to construct a Jim Walters home on property they had already purchased and paid for due to arbitrarily dictated guidelines; Inasmuch as I must receive a “Mother may I” from this court to even sell 5 acres of my ranch land in unincorporated Ellis County; I do highly recommend that this court think long and hard before granting permission to those desirous of constructing and facilitating an “Halal” slaughter house in our County.   

I trust that the Commissioners’ Court will look to Christ and the United States Constitution for guidance, not to Mohamed and the Quran, and that they will not fall victim to bastardization of our United States Constitution in their adjudication of this matter for fear of offending someone, or being afraid to appear politically incorrect, or even worse, to appease the wishes of wealthy business people who have given large financial contributions to certain members of this Court for their political endeavors.

Our county, our nation and our future are much more important than political careers. 

I thank this Court for your time, and for allowing me to respectfully present my opinion.

DAVID CHRISTOPHER HUNNICUTT,

This entry was posted on Monday, December 8th, 2008 at 4:25 pm and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.