Moderateman Moderateman

The New Hate Crimes Bill..Plan to remove Freedom of Religion

▼

The New Hate Crimes Bill..Plan to remove Freedom of Religion

Paving the Way for Homosexuals to gain civil rights as a protected class

from JoeUser Forums

Our government is a republic, and in a republic we elect men and women to represent us, {piss poor job that they do} in our legislative bodies and we elect executives to make sure that laws passed by the legislatures are carried out. If our laws are not upheld, anarchy would be the result.

We citizens vote and MOST of us are looking for honest and wise representatives who will RESPECT the consent of the GOVERNED. However it is becoming almost impossible to find these people with so many "self seekers" among those elected to high office.

Last May the Democratic run House passed a bill {Federal Hate Crimes} that mandates further penalties for crimes involving sexual orientation or gender identity. If it passes the Senate it will make Homosexuality and Gender Identity a civil rights issue.

I believe this is a very dangerous bill as it would have ramification on Religion, meaning if a pastor, priest, rabbi says from the pulpit that homosexuality is a sin they could be tried for a hate crime.

Representative Lamar Smith {R TEXAS} said of this bill that " criminal killing a Homosexual will be treated more harshly that a criminal that kills a cop, or a child or a senior citizen or any other person" I believe all people should be treated equally under the eyes of the law.

The republicans offered 25 amendments to clarify and and improve the bill but were denied by the Democratic run house to even be heard.

Dan Lundgren {R CALIFORNIA} asked for further clarification of gender identity, the Democrats refused to discuss it.

Randy Forbes {R VIRGINIA} said that "our military is being attacked in America, being spit on and beaten, in several areas are told not to wear their uniforms while on pass or leave" He wanted to include the military in this hate crimes bill, once again the Democrats refused to discuss it. So much for "looking out and supporting out men and women in uniform huh?"

Other Republican representatives wanted to add senior citizens to this bill, once again the Democrats refused to discuss it. So much for the Liberals taking care of "out honored old folk"

Other Republicans wanted to add pregnant women to the bill, Once again the Democrats that have no problem with murdering children in the womb would not allow discussion about protecting the expectant mothers.

Representative Mike Pence {R INDIANA} presented an important amendment about freedom of religion, concerned about the possibility of religious folk being tried for hate crimes by being faithful to their religion and espousing that homosexuality is a sin, again denied By the Democrats.

Rev. Lou Sheldon head of the Traditional Values Coalition {who was present at the bills vote} said " By refusing to accept any of these amendments the Democrats have Proven their purpose of removing freedom of religion from the constitution. I heartily Agree.

AS Thomas Jefferson once warned "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." We need to remember his words and see that laws passed by our representative are fair to everyone.

 

"
7,102 views 66 replies
Reply #51 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ok, and what if I'm walking with a friend of mine who is gay, and we both get attacked. Will it be a hate crime for attacking him, but just simple assault and battery for attacking me?


Actually, if you are 2 heterosexual who are attacked by people, hitting you down while screaming "Faggot", it will be a hate crime!!!
Reply #52 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yeah, that's a great idea. Instead of mounting opposition to this sort of law being made FEDERAL, leaving no individual State even the choice to enact or eschew such legislation, we should just shut up and worry about our own back yard.


My point is that those laws are already on the books in over 30 states. The federal law does not have a punishment component, it still has to pass the senate and will probably face a presidential veto.

If you want to call or write your senators about the pending federal hate crimes legislation, be my guest. The issues that everyone seems to be most concerned about differing levels of punishment, free speech etc. are not a part of the federal bill.
Galactic Civilizations III
Reply #53 from JoeUser Forums Top

Yet none of these supposedly exalted groups have special protections under law. The concept of equality says they are all the same, human beings with God given inalienable rights. No one should be seen as 'more valuable' or 'more worthy of protection' in the eyes of the law. When we increase penalties for crimes committed against protected classes, we completely lose sight of "equality."


B-I-N-G-O!

I think the federal hate crimes bill that we are discussing passed through the House or is working its way through now.
I got an email asking me to call my representatives. This one is particularly onerous becasue it adds a federal hate crime on top of the state hate crime.

"The new Democrat majority is at it again, but this time they have really outdone themselves! Not only have they proposed yet another bill that violates the U.S. Constitution, but they have managed to introduce new Hate Crimes legislation that undermines not one, not two, but three constitutional guarantees—freedom of speech, religious expression, and equal protection under the law for all Americans!

It was sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, would make hate crimes (a crime in which the victim is intentionally selected based on his or her race, religion, ethnicity, gender, etc.) a federal offense and it would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as protected classes in the U.S. criminal code (Title 18). The bill would also mandate federal criminal prosecution for state offenses, with the possibility of life imprisonment, for crimes motivated by the “actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person.”

H.R. 1592 violates both the 1st and 14th Amendments by infringing upon these constitutional guarantees:

1----Freedom of Speech—by silencing and punishing all opposing viewpoints.
2----Religious Expression—by targeting faith groups, specifically Christians, who hold traditional beliefs on homosexuality.
3----Equal Protection—by granting more government protection to certain classes of people.

We don’t need a new law! Hate crimes are actually on the decrease! Less than 17% of all law enforcement agencies reported a single hate crime in 2005. We just need strict enforcement of existing laws—to protect ALL Americans equally.
Reply #54 from JoeUser Forums Top
2----Religious Expression—by targeting faith groups, specifically Christians, who hold traditional beliefs on homosexuality.


you could also change "traditional" with "intolerant".

If church supported that blacks aren't the same people as other, would preventing them to spread that belief be that wrong?

Or Jews, or any other group?
Reply #55 from JoeUser Forums Top
you could also change "traditional" with "intolerant".


Right there, cikomyr, you expressed intolerance. Are you not aware that makes you a hypocrite?

You are intolerant against those you view as "intolerant". Don't we have the same rights to freedom of speech as anyone else, or does freedom of speech only entail freedom of speech YOU approve?
Reply #56 from JoeUser Forums Top
Actually, if you are 2 heterosexual who are attacked by people, hitting you down while screaming "Faggot", it will be a hate crime!!!


Ah, so it is all about the speach and the thought, and not the crime itself.
Reply #57 from JoeUser Forums Top
lulapilgrimJune 29, 2007 20:30:31


Hey, ModMan, now add to that this hypothetical...what else would have been added to Sonny's sentence time had he called his opponent a "homo, "fag" or "queer" "Chink" especially in the Ninth District COurt?


I shudder to think. lula.
Reply #58 from JoeUser Forums Top
(Citizen)little-whipJune 29, 2007 19:50:35


Thank God we didn't fall for this sort of thinking in regards to illegal immigration.


amen sista. the only way to defeat Federal bill is to worry the Senators about their JOBS, this way can can stop this luncay from becoming law.
Reply #59 from JoeUser Forums Top
LocamamaJune 29, 2007 20:35:38


My point is that those laws are already on the books in over 30 states. The federal law does not have a punishment component, it still has to pass the senate and will probably face a presidential veto.

If you want to call or write your senators about the pending federal hate crimes legislation, be my guest. The issues that everyone seems to be most concerned about differing levels of punishment, free speech etc. are not a part of the federal bill.


Amy the ENTIRE POINT OF MAKING ANY CRIME INTO A HATE CRIME is to do one thing only add time, more punishment. period, I don't care what the bill says the end result is, it will become a hate crime to smack a fag and call him a fag while smacking him, making a simple assault into a hate crime. NOW AMY STOP BEING DENSE AND CONTRARY!
Reply #60 from JoeUser Forums Top
CikomyrJune 29, 2007 22:52:20Reply #60


CikomyrJune 29, 2007 22:52:20


If church supported that blacks aren't the same people as other, would preventing them to spread that belief be that wrong?

Or Jews, or any other group?


For 2000 year the biggest Christian Church the roman Catholics preached that JEWS {I AM A JEW} were bad people, we sacrificed babies blah blah blah, no one did shit about it, toll pope John Paul the Second "forgave the JEWS" Which btw pissed me off.
No one did squat about it, NO bills were intoduced to make the Church stop.
Reply #61 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply By: Gideon MacLeishPosted: Friday, June 29, 2007
you could also change "traditional" with "intolerant".


Right there, cikomyr, you expressed intolerance. Are you not aware that makes you a hypocrite?

You are intolerant against those you view as "intolerant". Don't we have the same rights to freedom of speech as anyone else, or does freedom of speech only entail freedom of speech YOU approve?

How many times have I said Liberal thinkers are only believe in free speech when you agree with them.

Reply #62 from JoeUser Forums Top

you could also change "traditional" with "intolerant".

If church supported that blacks aren't the same people as other, would preventing them to spread that belief be that wrong?

Or Jews, or any other group?


Keeping the Church out of it and staying with the hate crime law itself. Hate crimes legislation seeks to add "sexual orientation" to the list of protected classes. "Sexual orientation" is defined as one's sexual behavior, as heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality.

If you will note the other protected classes are race, color, ethnicity, etc.

Being Black or Jewish is an innate characteristic, that is, something which is inherently unchangeable. To this list, the law would attempt to add "sexual behavior" and that is where the rub comes in. One's sexual behavior, on the other hand, is changeable and freely chosen to be acted upon or not.

Reply #63 from JoeUser Forums Top

For 2000 year the biggest Christian Church the roman Catholics preached that JEWS {I AM A JEW} were bad people, we sacrificed babies blah blah blah, no one did shit about it, toll pope John Paul the Second "forgave the JEWS" Which btw pissed me off.


Phew, MM, you really unloaded here.

Concerning:

For 2000 year the biggest Christian Church the roman Catholics preached that JEWS {I AM A JEW} were bad people,


Please check back on your own blogs where I've written to the best of my ability the position and relationship (theologically speaking) of the CC towards Jews. I'm thinking of the one about the antichrist is Jewish #72.

Also, the Catechism of the CC has this: 839 on the relationship of the Church with the Jewish People.

"When she delves into her own mystery, the CHurch, the people of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People, the first to hear the word of God. The Jewish faith, unlike other non-CHristian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the OLd Covenant. To the Jews, "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the CHrist, "for the gifts and the call of GOd are irrevokable."

840 When one considers the future, GOd's people of the OLd COvenant and the new People of God tend towards similiar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messias. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of the Messias, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.


Reply #64 from JoeUser Forums Top
lulapilgrimJune 30, 2007 14:12:11


I did not c and p anything you wrote above.

I grew up with Roman Catholics to the tune of "Christ killer" And being spit on because I was a Jew, all that continued till I grew and folks learned that calling me derogatory names earned them a horrendous beating from me, Including broken bones, while I chanted things Like " where is Christ now?" How come he ain't protecting your sorry punk ass from a JEW right now" "If I am such scum and a Christ killer, Why is he letting me beat your sorry ass into mush?" things of that nature. Soon all name calling stopped, not out of respect for my religion, but out of FEAR of CONSEQUENCES. Personally When Pope John Paul "forgave" the JEWS I was so furious I could spit. But I was older and wiser and took the gesture for that's all it was to me a gesture delivered 2000 years to late. To hold an entire people responsible for the crucifixion of Christ because of a FEW greedy Rabbis that were in fear of losing their personal power was a crime that I still have not forgotten. I forgave the Catholics and Christians BUT I WILL never forget the treatment I received just because I am a JEW, at the hands of Roman Catholics.
Reply #66 from JoeUser Forums Top

to the tune of "Christ killer".....I forgave the Catholics and Christians BUT I WILL never forget the treatment I received just because I am a JEW, at the hands of Roman Catholics.


Wow, MM, I had no idea of all this. I'm relatively new on JU and hadn't read your blog until now.

What's a Catholic like me to say about this except the truth as I see it. It was ignorant, cruel, heartless and wrong to say such things. That lady was not acting Catholic when she insulted and hurt you and I would be the first one to correct her is given the chance. I too must apologize to you for her actions.

The important thing is that you have forgiven those who hurt you so badly and that's what it's all about.

Concerning who was guilty of our Lord's sufferings and death. Neither the malice of the chief priests by their false accusations, nor the weak compliance of Pilate could have caused Our Lord's death had not God decreed that His Incarnate Son was to die to redeem us from sin and eternal punishment. It's all our sins, MM, that bear the real burden and guilt of Christ's sufferings and death. It's our sins that cry out, "Crucify Him". By our sins we nailed Him to the Cross.