Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House Approves 'ANTI-HATE' Bill Amendment
National Prayer Network ^ | Sept. 26 2005 | Rev. Ted Pike

Posted on 09/26/2005 12:47:56 PM PDT by manumission

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last

1 posted on 09/26/2005 12:47:58 PM PDT by manumission
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: manumission

Hmmm yeah tell me again why I should go vote Republican again?

oh.. for the Chilren


2 posted on 09/26/2005 12:49:29 PM PDT by Leatherneck_MT (3-7-77 (No that's not a Date))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manumission

I'm in favor of equal protection for everyone.

That includes homosexuals and all races and genders.

So is the cosntitution. How is this bill requiring unequal protection possibly gonna be constitutional?

How did it pass with a Republican majority?


3 posted on 09/26/2005 12:51:45 PM PDT by gondramB ( There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manumission

It won't survive the court challenge, but write your Senator and demand a no vote.


4 posted on 09/26/2005 12:52:06 PM PDT by wvobiwan (Liberal Slogan: "News maganizes don't kill people, Muslims do." - Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manumission

I hope you aren't criticising the GOP. If so, you couldn't be more wrong. You see, you "my way or the highway" conservatives just don't get it. This is all part of a grand strategy to defeat the democrats, once that is accomplished, then we can start talking about promoting our agenda. /sarcasm


5 posted on 09/26/2005 12:52:24 PM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manumission

I don't scare easy, but this does the trick.

Libertarian party here I come.


6 posted on 09/26/2005 12:54:29 PM PDT by HonestConservative (Bless our Servicemen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manumission
I hope that does not mean Howard Dean is illegal now. He is so much fun!
7 posted on 09/26/2005 12:55:05 PM PDT by SF Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wvobiwan

#####It won't survive the court challenge#####


That's what everyone said about McCain-Feingold. The 1st Amendment is now considered "optional" by some of our Supreme Court justices.


8 posted on 09/26/2005 12:55:39 PM PDT by puroresu (Conservatism is an observation; Liberalism is an ideology)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: manumission

What a load of crap!

This essentially states that Congress can make things up and we have to buy it. For each class of characteristic they deem to be a protected class, including, sexual preference, they claim that people are being forced across state lines to avoid persecution???

Where?????


9 posted on 09/26/2005 12:55:48 PM PDT by Paloma_55 (Which part of "Common Sense" do you not understand???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wvobiwan

That's what Bush said about McCain-Fiengold.


10 posted on 09/26/2005 12:56:04 PM PDT by massgopguy (massgopguy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

How is this bill requiring unequal protection possibly gonna be constitutional?

How did it pass with a Republican majority?
-----
Because too many Repubs ARE NOT CONSERVATIVES, especially Constitutional conservatives. That is why this crap passed...


11 posted on 09/26/2005 12:56:16 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT
Hmmm yeah tell me again why I should go vote Republican again?

Because you are a lemming incapable of independant thought who believes that voting for anyone not on the status-quo ticket is throwing your vote away?

Other than that, I can't think of a single reason.

12 posted on 09/26/2005 12:56:24 PM PDT by Stu Cohen (Press '1' for English)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wvobiwan
It won't survive the court challenge

What makes you think that? This kind of stuff clearly violates the Constitution, but it's been decades since the courts worried about that.

And I don't for a minute buy the excuse that this amendment was slipped in secretively. You don't even need to read a bill with "hate crimes" in its title to know what is going on.

13 posted on 09/26/2005 12:58:05 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: manumission

Absolutely astounding..

Are these supposed to be laugh lines???

"These authorities can carry out their responsibilities more effectively with greater Federal assistance"

"..it devastates not just the actual victim and the family and friends of the victim, but frequently savages the community sharing the traits that caused the victim to be selected. "

"Such violence substantially affects interstate commerce in many ways:.."


14 posted on 09/26/2005 12:58:26 PM PDT by Pessimist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

LOL I can see you've learned the lines well. No doubt from hearing them so often.. :)


15 posted on 09/26/2005 12:59:49 PM PDT by Pessimist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wvobiwan
"It won't survive the court challenge........."

Yeah, right! They said the same thing about "campaign finance reform", and "eminent domain" too. Guess what.....

16 posted on 09/26/2005 1:01:20 PM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: manumission
Notify the Republican Congressional Committee that you will no longer be contributing. I did and told them why. I got the feeling I wasn't the first.
17 posted on 09/26/2005 1:04:27 PM PDT by bella1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manumission

Christian property in the confiscation crosshairs..

Go long in guillotine stox...


18 posted on 09/26/2005 1:07:10 PM PDT by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stu Cohen

lol thank you, I needed that chuckle this afternoon.


19 posted on 09/26/2005 1:09:03 PM PDT by Leatherneck_MT (3-7-77 (No that's not a Date))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: manumission

Check out excuse #9 for why this falls under interstate commerce:

"Such violence is committed using articles that have traveled in interstate commerce"

Well, there you have it. We all wear clothes and eat food that have crossed state lines. Apparently then congress has the constitutional right to regulate any and every action of every single American.

Glad they cleared that up for me.

This has to be a new high water mark in the stretching of that notion. I thought I had seen it all when it was applied to drug free school zones, but no. This takes it.


20 posted on 09/26/2005 1:09:39 PM PDT by Pessimist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson