Posted on 07/19/2004 12:05:13 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Edited on 07/24/2004 1:26:46 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The U.S. Senate has passed Ted Kennedy's so-called "hate crimes" bill. In the words of the Traditional Values Coalition, it will criminalize a person's thoughts and provides unequal penalties for the same crime—depending upon the motivation of the accused. That means that the media that possibly provoked or influenced commission of the crime will come in for scrutiny. Yet our liberal media have remained silent on the constitutional and First Amendment implications of this approach.
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
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
Don't kid yourselves - the reason for this bill is to punish Christians who would open their Bibles and proclaim that homosexuality is sinful...The liberals wish to put down all religious freedoms until we have none left. Christians who don't vote out the liberals in their state are just asking for the persecution that is to come!
This is very very very bad.
Is this completely a done deal, or does it need Bush's signature, or what?
Congratulations to Senator Ted Kennedy:
I wish to extend my congratulations to Senator Ted Kennedy on this day, July 19, 2004, the 35th Anniversary of his killing of Mary Jo Kopechne.
Have another drink on me, senator.
It's amazing that Civil Libertarians wail about the PATRIOT Act, but not a peep about this.
From July 19, '04:
Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy In Media
http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/1745_0_2_0_C/
The U.S. Senate has passed Ted Kennedy's so-called "hate crimes" bill. In the words of the Traditional Values Coalition, it will criminalize a person's thoughts and provides unequal penalties for the same crime—depending upon the motivation of the accused. That means that the media that possibly provoked or influenced commission of the crime will come in for scrutiny. Yet our liberal media have remained silent on the constitutional and First Amendment implications of this approach.
Some, mostly on the conservative right, are speaking out. Besides the Traditional Values Coalition, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation has denounced the bill, noting that France has pursued the same approach in the prosecution of Brigette Bardot for a book she wrote critical of Islam.
The Republican Study Committee produced an analysis of the Kennedy approach that concludes that it creates a federal "thought crime."
The approach requires that prosecutors inquire into "an offender's overall philosophy or biases…" It declares, "The Kennedy bill makes philosophy, politics, biases, and general viewpoints the subject of almost every violent crime."
There are two main groups pushing for this approach. They are militant homosexuals and militant Muslims.
Talking about "hate crimes" against Muslims in the U.S., Kennedy declared, "These hate crimes included murders, beatings, arson, attacks on mosques, shootings, and other assaults."
Since these are already crimes that can be prosecuted under the law, what is the added significance of branding them "hate crimes?" Because a "hate crime" is usually detected by a background investigation of the accused person, authorities could analyze an accused person's diaries, journals, books, magazines or favorite television programs. This opens the door to judgments that certain news organizations could be deemed "hateful" if they are said to have played a role in provoking a particular crime.
Here, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has featured "action alerts" targeting Paul Harvey, Dr. Laura, radio host Jay Severin, Rich Lowry of National Review, and Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly of Fox News. In response to "increased attacks on Islam by conservative talk show hosts," CAIR has now launched a "Hate Hurts America" campaign.
Ironically, Muslims themselves could come in for scrutiny under the "hate crimes" bill because their religion teaches that homosexuality is wrong.
Senator Rick Santorum said he did not believe in "criminalizing thought." He explained, "I have always said the greatest of the freedoms we have in this country is the freedom to believe what we want to believe and the freedom to think what we want to think. I know there are lots of motivations for people to do things and there are lots of bad thoughts out there in people's minds, but we do not criminalize those. We only criminalize them if there are actions taken…I think protecting the freedom of belief and the freedom to think the way one wants to think is an important concept in our country…and I believe this hate crimes amendment violates that very premise."
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at editor@aim.org.
Homosexuality is a perverted lifestyle.
Ted Kennedy killed Mary Jo.
Bill Clinton sold America up the river and Kerry etal will do the same if given the chance.
That's what I think! Heck, that's what I KNOW!!
Based on this criteria, Teddy Boy could be indicted on multiple offenses.
I don't think it has passed the House and it probably won't. If this is what I think it is, some RINOs and Rats got it attached to the DoD budget bill. Every time it has been tried before, the House had it stripped out in Conference and the bill's Senate sponsor says he expects it to happen again.
PEEP.
I think this stinks. Yet more erosion of the 1st Amendment and contempt for liberty in general. But to be expected with decades of "compelling government interest" 1st Amendment exceptions pushed by both parties. You see, the 1st has been gutted. Now, shockingly, it isn't around when you need it. Wow, who would have expected that?!
Anyway, it's refreshing to see FR's "conservative" posters concerned with 1st Amendment violations, even if only when it's your ox being gored.
Thought crime???
Is that like making thinking a crime? I can see why the Liberal Left is pushing this. They're safe.
Why this fat toad doesn't burst into flames is beyond me. RIP, Mary Jo.
Hate crime legislation establishes for homosexual activist litigators (LAMBDA) important premises for their lawsuits. Most of their legislative aims these days are about legal premises. Once they figured out that all they desire can be attained far more easily through courts than through legislatures, they've really just focused on establishing premises. Once they pull in the big court win -- gay marriage -- watch out. They're not even secret about it. What they've been doing to punish the Boy Scouts will be shown to be nothing but batting practice for the real game.
My own take on this is along parallel lines- I believe it will be used to silence, then persecute, any critique of the more odious features of the Gay Lifestyle. It's blatant, IMO.
You are right. Protected status establishes all dissenters as bigots. That's the premise they want.
See my new tagline... unfortunately, the latter need the former's money, so they won't let go voluntarily.
Exactly... and the irony is not lost on me- I have a gay neighbor who is a perfectly nice person, and as unlike the weird "spokepersons" you see paraded around on TV as I am. Yet to those on the Left, I'm a Homophobe because I won't applaud their more extreme demands.
If allowed to stand (no chance in Hell, IMO), this will mark the longest step down the slippery slope of becoming a democracy rather than a republic.
Note to self: Buy ammo. Lots of it.
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.