Skip to comments.
U.S. House backs hate crime measure protecting gays
Reuters ^
| 9-14-2005
| Joanne Kenen
Posted on 09/14/2005 4:28:18 PM PDT by COEXERJ145
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 361-366 next last
To: COEXERJ145
how can this be stopped?
What happened they "backdoored" this on some must pass law?
There is more to this story.
To: Dane
Thanks! I missed the other link somehow!
What a shame that 30 Republicans voted for this nonsense. I was at least glad to see that two of the five Democrats who voted against it were from my state of Tennessee (Davis & Tanner). My rock solid GOP congressman Jenkins voted "no", as I would have expected.
122
posted on
09/14/2005 6:32:15 PM PDT
by
puroresu
(Conservatism is an observation; Liberalism is an ideology)
To: Dog Gone
PER FNC, this was an AMENDMENT to a law to stiffen reporting of SEX CRIMES.
IOW the democrats were voting agains stricter reporting of pedophiles etc.
The republicans were voting FOR stricter reporting of sex crime.
THIS HAD BETTER BE FIXED.
HASSERT BETTER WAKE UP FAST!!
To: puroresu
WHAT ELSE is going to be tricked through.
HASSERT BETTER FIX THIS.
Comment #125 Removed by Moderator
To: angrylibertarian
Puke on my shoes? What's wrong with your brain? Sounds like your irrational anger got the best of you.
For the record, I am totally, 100% opposed to any and all "hate crimes" categories. It's nothing more than judging people by their thoughts. It means that a feeble old (white) lady's life is worth less than a homosexual's. Which is insanity. It is already illegal to kill or beat anyone up. (Not counting in self-defense, at least some places).
That's all that is needed. Anything else is merely currying favor with special interst groups. Giving special treatment to certain groups - especially those whose only claim to specialness is their currently preferred method of sexual gratification - is unconstitutional and immoral.
126
posted on
09/14/2005 6:40:02 PM PDT
by
little jeremiah
(A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, are incompatible with freedom. P. Henry)
To: angrylibertarian
Where does the Constitution delegate authority to Congress to enact such legislation, in your opinion?
127
posted on
09/14/2005 6:42:26 PM PDT
by
Ken H
To: COEXERJ145
Every member of the US House who voted for this is GAY!
128
posted on
09/14/2005 6:49:38 PM PDT
by
clyde asbury
(Whoever controls the present controls the future - or so they think.)
To: COEXERJ145
129
posted on
09/14/2005 6:50:13 PM PDT
by
zendari
To: Dane
It passed overwhelmingly! Didn't anyone notice that they had slipped in a hate-crimes amendment?
What was the vote on the hate-crimes amendment?
130
posted on
09/14/2005 6:52:40 PM PDT
by
AuH2ORepublican
(http://auh2orepublican.blogspot.com/)
To: AuH2ORepublican
See the link in reply #87.
131
posted on
09/14/2005 6:56:26 PM PDT
by
Dane
( anyone who believes hillary would do something to stop illegal immigration is believing gibberish)
To: COEXERJ145
"It is a fantastic and welcome development," said Michael Lieberman of the Anti-Defamation League, which has been pushing for such legislation for several years.
Michael Lieberman is GAY!
132
posted on
09/14/2005 6:56:51 PM PDT
by
clyde asbury
(Whoever controls the present controls the future - or so they think.)
To: OXENinFLA; All
All part of the big plan.
133
posted on
09/14/2005 6:57:08 PM PDT
by
Rca2000
( "What? No gravy? (POW!!) "Next time, remember the gravy!!!"(From "Chow Hound",1951.))
To: Rca2000
The big plan is GAY!
Also, I HATE the big plan!
If President Bush doesn't veto this, then President Bush is GAY!
134
posted on
09/14/2005 7:06:21 PM PDT
by
clyde asbury
(Whoever controls the present controls the future - or so they think.)
To: planekT
And they wanted to sneak it in while everybody is talking about Katrina. I might have expected some garbage like this coming out of the Senate but not the House.
135
posted on
09/14/2005 7:11:43 PM PDT
by
Reagan is King
(Those who say it cannot be done should not interrupt the people doing it)
To: COEXERJ145
This time the hate crime measure was attached to a bipartisan bill known as the Children's Safety Act aimed at tightening reporting requirements for child sex offenders. Isn't it ironic (or insulting) that they attached a homo protection bill to a Child Safety Act. Did NAMBLA sponsor this bill? /s
136
posted on
09/14/2005 7:16:37 PM PDT
by
Reagan is King
(Those who say it cannot be done should not interrupt the people doing it)
Comment #137 Removed by Moderator
To: clyde asbury
If President Bush doesn't veto this, and KNOWS about the little "addition" to the bill,
Then, I WILL LOSE MY RESPECT FOR HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
138
posted on
09/14/2005 7:31:14 PM PDT
by
Rca2000
( "What? No gravy? (POW!!) "Next time, remember the gravy!!!"(From "Chow Hound",1951.))
To: rockabyebaby
Hate crimes??? Isn't EVERY crime a hate crime, I am soooooo sick of every minority having their own set of rules.A hate crime by definition is one designed to influence a group of people. If I kill a person because they are black, it's a hate crime because it's supposed to send fear to all members of the black community.
I disagree with the idea of "hate crimes", but that is what the intent of the law is all about.
139
posted on
09/14/2005 7:31:36 PM PDT
by
va4me
("Government isn't the solution to the problem, it is the problem" - Ronald Reagan)
To: Nowhere Man; little jeremiah
140
posted on
09/14/2005 7:39:42 PM PDT
by
Rca2000
( "What? No gravy? (POW!!) "Next time, remember the gravy!!!"(From "Chow Hound",1951.))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 361-366 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson