U.S. House backs hate crime measure protecting gays

Reuters ^ | 9-14-2005 | Joanne Kenen

[COEXERJ145]

WASHINGTON, Sept 14 (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday unexpectedly backed a measure to expand federal hate crime protection to gay people, a measure that House conservatives had blocked for years.

The Senate has passed similar legislation, which also expanded protections for the disabled, several times in recent years but House conservatives had argued that these cases should be dealt with on a local or state level without additional federal intervention.

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. Companion legislation has not yet moved through the Senate, so the ultimate fate of the gay protection provision is uncertain.

Still backers were jubilant.

[Coleus]

House adds sexual orientation to 'hate crimes'
OKs amendment to child-safety bill with help of 30 Republicans

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

In what is being characterized as an unexpected move, the U.S. House of Representatives today approved an amendment to a child-safety bill that adds "sexual orientation" to the federal "hate crimes" statute.

The amendment to the Children's Safety Act – which, among other things, creates a national website for child sex offenders and stipulates that sex felons face up to 20 years in prison for failing to comply with registration requirements – was offered by Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., and passed 223-199. Thirty Republicans, 192 Democrats and one Independent voted to add the "sexual orientation" language, while 194 Republicans and five Democrats voted no.

According an Associated Press report, current "hate crimes" law includes stiffer penalties for federal offenses when the attacker is motivated by the actual or perceived race, religion or ethnic background. The Conyers provision adds to that list sexual orientation, gender and disability.

The House has been the chief obstacle in numerous previous attempts to expand federal "hate crimes" law, and Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest homosexual-rights group, told AP today's was an "incredibly historic vote" that could give momentum to similar action in the Senate.

Robert Knight of Concerned Women for America was stunned the vote was taken with virtually no notice.

"We had no notice that this was happening," Knight said in an e-mail announcing the action. "The only positive thing I can say is that this was a recorded vote."

The bill itself was approved by a 371-52 vote in the House.

A roll call of the Conyers amendment vote can be viewed on the House of Representatives website.

The Family Research Council is blasting the action in no small terms.

"Criminalizing thoughts as well as actions, and creating special categories of victims, are contrary to our entire system of laws," said FRC president Tony Perkins. "Furthermore, granting special protections based on one's 'sexual orientation' has repeatedly been rejected by Congress. It is shocking that a bill designed to protect children from sexual predators is now being used to protect the sexual preference of homosexuals.

"The Senate should reject the House's attempt to advance the political agenda of homosexuals at the expense of children."

[Wormwood]

Pathetic. We control both houses of Congress, and the Rats are STILL moving the ball on us

Younwant a sure-fire way to win big?

Always bet on the spinelessness of an elected Republican.

[MonitorMaid]

I'd add a few more keywords to your collection but I'd be banned for certain! Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...

One step closer to getting the Bible banned.

[Antoninus]

Pathetic. We control both houses of Congress, and the Rats are STILL moving the ball on us.

Exactly. Instead of recinding ALL of this "hate crimes" nonsense, our beloved GOP reps are adding new and exciting categories to it.

Utterly sickening!

[Tench_Coxe]

Well, I might as well get this one in before the law is passed:

[concerned about politics]

Well, for those of you mad enough to do something about this, take a moment and fax some people for free:

Done. I was polite, but not at all happy.

[Bogolyubski]

It's called the Hegelian Mambo. You dance to the left, do a fake to the right, dance to the left, do a fake to the right, dance to the left. The plaid-pants platoon who own the Republican party are masters at this dance. They are also masters at playing Evangelical Christians like a cheap violin. Our great Republican heroes - moving form victory to victory!

Only a matter of time before we're treated to pastors being sued by the Feds or hauled off to jail for "inciting homophobic hatred", just as they are now in Soviet Kanuckistan and Sweden. The Lamda Legal Defense Fund (you know, the well-heeled homosexual activist group that our new "conservative" nominee for chief justice did "crucial" pro-bono work for), will start legal proceedings a la the SPLC to root out all of those dreadful "hate" organizations - any church that refuses to perform gay weddings, for example.

Morris Dees must be salivating. Just think of all of the church property he can get his hands on through lawsuits brought on behalf of that most persecuted group (whose income is twice the national average). I'm sure that the FBI, ATF, et al, will be directed to start investigations of every single unfalttering scriptural reference mentioned - especially once her highness ascends to the Cherry-Blossom throne.

Oh, but it can't happen here!!!........

[HiTech RedNeck]

The heat on Bush to veto this one is going to be "7 times hotter"

[JSteff]

Too much Canadian beer or spring water or something.....

[JSteff]

"Here's a dumb question: what provision of the Constitution authorizes Congress to pass this kind of legislation?"

Actually several things about this are CONTRARY to the Constitution.

[vikingd00d]

We now have laws governing what you can and cannot think about. Think about that!

I would, but I think that's been made illegal. :)

[HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath]

Get ready for the next disaster as America comes crumbling down.

[XpandTheEkonomy]

Some far-seeing people, including lifelong socialist George Orwell, predicted Thought Police years ago.

Well, Orwell was a peculiar socialist wasn't he? He disemboweled Marxism in Animal Farm. And excoriated the Nanny State in 1984. I am right wing and to me he is one of the great heroes.

[Halgr]

I see all these people here at Freepers and I think that so many of us just vent our frustrations here....but what if we could do something about this....what if we were more organized....wouldn't this many people have some kind of political clout....couldn't we do something to take back America????

[XpandTheEkonomy]

Why don't they just pass a law saying that any crime that isn't against a straight white man is a hate crime, and be done with it.

Crystal clear thinking. I say you win the thread and I'm not to the last page yet.

[XpandTheEkonomy]

I heard the other day that some Priest/Bishop in Canada is being fined $10K for writing a letter to the editor against exposing children to homosexuality issues. He may go to prison if he doesn't pay up...In fact $2K has to go to a homosexual advocacy group.

Get ready. We are approaching the point where discussion is pointless. In fact it leads straight to jail. Canada blew on past this point without a fight apparently. We will fight.

The faint beat of the Drums of War (civil) were heard by the founders as early as the 1790s. By the 1840s it was clear to many. We are heading there again just not North vs South. These are irreconcilable differences.

[va4me]

Hate is an emotion, so laws against "hate crimes" seek to make certain emotions illegal. Presumably, then, there are emotions that a person is supposed to feel when committing a crime, as well as certain emotions which is isn't OK to feel when committing these crimes.

There are lots of examples of these sorts of differentiations in the law. If one person kills another the prosecuter will bring various charges based on factors such as "was it premeditated", "was there an intent to kill", etc.

[XpandTheEkonomy]

I see all these people here at Freepers and I think that so many of us just vent our frustrations here....but what if we could do something about this....what if we were more organized....

Instead of voicing disgust or revulsion with the gay lifestyle, let's consider concentrating on the heart of the matter which is the struggle for raw power i.e. who will send whom to jail for what behavior.

Make no mistake: Homosexuals represent a competing elite. They will use in-group strategies to take over most any bureaucracy. Witness the mainline churches. They will set up a hetero glass ceiling if allowed. This is the primary reason they have been closeted throughout history. The politically incorrect elites of the past have consistently controlled them with violence and intimidation out of sheer necessity.

Homosexuals are well into a strategic 40 year campaign to remake US society. This is low-intensity violent revolution on their part. My advice is stop concentrating on the lifestyle. This is nothing less than war on the world as you know it.

Their desired future means homosexuals in every key power position in society (media, churces, government etc.), the utter destruction of marriage and the normalization of sex with children as in Roman times. Capisce?

[mlc9852]

Exactly - but the homosexuals obviously deserve VERY special treatment.

[clyde asbury]

There are lots of examples of these sorts of differentiations in the law.

"Hate crimes" are the only example I have heard of that explicitly name a specific emotion or spectrum of feelings. Intent to kill and premeditation name revealed motives, not emotions.

In any case, anyone who proposes, supports or defends new laws to protect certain groups in preference to others can go to h3ll.