Posted on 04/29/2009 11:33:48 AM PDT by Victory111
The House of Representatives just passed HR 1913 -- The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 -- on a vote of 234-190. The bill, which Obama has urged Congress to pass, would extend federal hate crimes laws to cover sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability, as well as race, color, religion, national origin, and sexual orientation.
Not a single Republican voted in favor. 15 Democrats voted against.
In the floor debate before the vote, North Carolina Republican Virginia Foxx called it a "hoax" that Matthew Shepard's killing had anything to do with him being gay.
Ted Kennedy and Olympia Snowe will lead the effort for passage in the Senate later in the year.
All joking aside, how will this affect Muslims preaching our destruction?
“...”hate crimes” laws are unethical regardless.”
I wish Congress would be honest for a moment and call it “Thought Crime.”
Wait... “I wish Congress would be honest for a moment...”
What am I saying? I guess I lost it there for a minute.
So soon the only things we can do in an argument is call someone a poopy pants or cootie magnet without getting charged with a hate crime.
Right, I’m aware of it in the nobility context, but I fail to see how that could be transformed into an attack on this, even assuming your broad definition for sake of argument. For example, the sexual orientation section label doesn’t only apply to homosexuals, but to all orientations, including straight.
Again, I oppose this bill for other reasons, but I don’t find your particular argument convincing.
All joking aside, how will this affect Muslims preaching our destruction?
The one thing I'm sure about is that it will defend the faith of Muslims and Christians equally before the law.
. . .
Bwahahahaha.
Sorry, couldn't resist. Yes, this is a good question. This will protect people's right to wear burkas in their drivers license photos, distribute jihadist literature, and preaching Death to America in the mosque. Anyone who objects to such expressions of their religious beliefs would be committing a hate crime.
(On the other hand, if your religion tells you that life begins at conception, you'll probably wind up on a DHS watchlist.)
The whole idea of a hate crime is insanity. The law should judge people on their actions, not something as subjective as hate. The Congress is trying to make windows into people’s souls. This is simply the first step in controlling not only people’s actions, but also their thoughts or beliefs. We now have governmental thought police. How will this affect churches that believe that homosexuality is a sin? Will clergy that oppose homosexuality from the pulpit be subject to hate laws?
It really doesn't matter how many members a special named class has, if it gets privileges denied to even one person, then the Constitution says they can't have their little titles of nobility or anything that goes with them.
I always thought it was most of them, actually. I read somewhere once that gay men have that same biological drive to have many partners that hetero men do, but are more able to express it because the pool of partners they draw from has the same urges. It's also one of the reasons that "gay marriage" is counter to the basic gay male instinct.
It's also true for people who break down on the side of the road and for people who stop to help them.
My wife never understands why I always take a gun with me when I travel out of town, preferably a politically correct, easily loaded rifle of some sort.
TJ also said that tree is watered by the blood of patriots, too
What person doesn’t? Even asexual is considered a sexual orientation...
But anyway, what support do you have for your understanding of the titiles of nobility? Any historical support you can provide to those of us who might be skeptical?
Umm, both defendants said that it did in their trial.
Any thinking, rational person should be able to come up with dozens of reasons why hate crime legislation is flawed and counterproductive, and why they couldn't support it without resorting to easily refuted, BS comments like Foxx's. And people wonder why the GOP is floundering with boobs like this in Congress.
Olympia Snowe - Next to Go!
Hate speech is not illegal, nor would it be under this law. Hate crimes are being punished-- i.e., something which is already a crime (asault, murder) will be more heavily punished if motivated by hate. The Supreme Court (in an opinion by Chief Justice Rehnquist) previously held (in a case involving racial prejudice) that hate crimes laws are not unconstitutional because they punish nothing which was legal before.
I refer you to the HISTORY OF EUROPE.
Your basic Title of Nobility granted "privileges" ~ that is, certain immunities, or benefits, from the government that were not offered to non-nobles or maybe not even other title holders.
A "title of nobility" establishes a class difference.
It was, as it turns out, not only better to be a Bourbon in France ~ it was FANTASTIC! You were virtually immune to the action of law PLUS you could probably travel around the country and move in with total strangers and live in their homes, eat their food, ride their horses (and whatever else) and have them hanged in the courtyard if they objected.
The Democrats never really agreed with the idea of not establishing a nobility, nor in eliminating slavery. Due to a failure of will the United States government failed to exterminate them at the conclusion of the Civil War, so here we are. Now they want to enshrine how they display their pudenda as something that entitles them to certain privileges and advantages under the law.
So typical of those who seek to abase themselves at the feet of tyrants.
The defendants were just trying to avoid being executed. They’d say whatever the prosecutor wanted.
Only if YOU include it.
The first thing we should do is file for every mean hateful thing, pie thrown, assault and slander that any liberal extremist has said or done to any white male, or conservative and use the “hate crime” law to enforce justice for a change. An Coulter could go to a liberal college to give a speech and with a battery of lawyers imprison half the crowd!! We could and should use this to our advantage, and ram it down their throats. After all, the insanity level of hatred is on their side. Conservatives don’t “hate” as liberals do IMHO, and I would love it if they had to live what they preach for a change. Law enforced tolerance of conservatives will have them repealing their own law eventually, and teach them some manners in the mean time.
This could be a good thing, even if it is unconstitutional.
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.