Posted on 06/25/2004 10:10:43 PM PDT by Salem
You mean we can't say anything about anything. Pretty soon we will have people reporting people. Welcome to Nazi Land or Communist Land, whichever you prefer.
Thought Police, George Orwell was a prophet?!
Funny how they are not lining up to silence the "Religion of piece" as it chops off heads and blows up children. I guess it is not hate, when they hate who you hate.
Bump for later reading
Here are links to recent articles about this bill - at least one of them has the text of the bill, and the last link has a list of all the Senators who votes for it:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1160062/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1157520/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1155843/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1154411/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1154850/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1154114/posts
I read the amendment. There's nothing in there even alluding to the idea of arresting those who tell people it's wrong to be a homosexual. You are full of bologna.
ping
Read it again. There must be something piggybacked or porkish there about something. Just on principle, anything coming out of this senate no good. :')
I certainly haven't said it's a Hate SPEECH bill. It's Hate CRIMES. The deal is they added "sexual orientation" to the list of victims that are more special than other victims.
So, IOW, if someone beats up a homosexual, it is a hate crime. If someone beats up my old mother, it is not a hate crime.
That's hateful.
It also is a small hop, skip and a jump from Hate Crimes to Hate Speech, and from Speech to Thought. It's already at Hate Speech in Canada, and Hate Thought in France. At any rate, Homophobia is now illegal in France.
And if people think it won't happen here, ten years ago you would have said (maybe did say) "it can't happen here" about stuff that's already happened.
A BILL To provide Federal assistance to States and local jurisdictions to prosecute hate crimes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2003'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem.
(2) Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive.
(3) State and local authorities are now and will continue to be responsible for prosecuting the overwhelming majority of violent crimes in the United States, including violent crimes motivated by bias. These authorities can carry out their responsibilities more effectively with greater Federal assistance.
(4) Existing Federal law is inadequate to address this problem.
(5) The prominent characteristic of a violent crime motivated by bias is that 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.
(6) Such violence substantially affects interstate commerce in many ways, including--
(A) by impeding the movement of members of targeted groups and forcing such members to move across State lines to escape the incidence or risk of such violence; and
(B) by preventing members of targeted groups from purchasing goods and services, obtaining or sustaining employment, or participating in other commercial activity.
(7) Perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence.
(8) Channels, facilities, and instrumentalities of interstate commerce are used to facilitate the commission of such violence.
(9) Such violence is committed using articles that have traveled in interstate commerce.
ETC ETC ETC
See the words "sexual orientation" in there?
That's what they added. It is now (or will be if it gets past the House and GW's desk) a worse crime to assault etc homosexuals than to assault a normal person.
And that's unnatural.
What's so "patriotic" about the Patriot Act in the first place?
Until now, fisticuffs resulting in minor damage were misdemeanor offenses, for the most part--not prison offenses. Laws like this criminalize too much of the population. Such laws are made by very small men. It's a stupid law with nasty agendas behind it.
I agree....back in 1993 or 1994 I had a conversation with a fellow Christian regarding same sex marriage and back then I believed it was DECADES away - boy was I wrong!!
We also discussed the possibility that pedophilia would no longer be considered a mental illness by the APA. I stated that it wouldn't happen in our lifetime. In 2003 (as posted on FR numerous times) the APA debated the issue.
Hate Crimes now, Hate Speech & Thought soon???
How so? The bill reads in part like this:
attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability of any person.
Since when is causing bodily injury to people different than you a Christian act? It actually protects Christians and those of other religions from being beaten up for their beliefs. What Christian belief or practice does this bill criminalize?
No, because it also says you can't beat someone up based on gender. So if they beat her up because she's a woman, that's a hate crime. If she's disabled in any way, it's a double hate crime, as the disabled are protected in there too.
Letter to the Editors, Washington Times, circa fall, 1998:
In the waning hours of the 105th Congress, quiet efforts to pass controversial legislation are under way.
The Hate Crimes Prevention Act... cites violence based on sexual orientation as a Hate Crime.
Hate Crimes have commonly been racially motivated. Only in Canada has sexual orientation been included in anti-hate and human rights legislation. The Canadian law does not focus exclusively on physical violence-- it includes all forms of communication as well.
...As a Canadian living in the United States, I fear for your freedom, mainly because you take it for granted.
If my words were published in a Canadian newspaper... I would be charged with inciting hate under the criminal code.
Freedom of speech no longer exists in Canada-- I could not state that AIDS is largely found within the homosexual community, nor quote statistics to back up my assertion.
My opinion would make me a criminal. Since "tolerance" has been redefined... only Political Correctness is tolerated...
The Hate Crimes Prevention Act is a signifigant foot in the door for homosexual rights lobbyists-- it validates the entire... movement as an endangered group in need of special legislative protection.
Violence against any person is already illegal, no matter what the motive.
I find it offensive that violence is noteworthy only when the victim ( is)... a member of some political action group.
Susan Mayhew
Herndon, Virginia
I wonder if most of the same Senators voted against the Marriage Amendment. Campbell voted against it if I remember correctly, and in favor of the bill this thread's about.
If so, a national education effort might be easy enough.
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.