"Hate Crimes" Bill Could Be Used to Attack Free Speech of Christians, Experts Say
They Point to Pastors Being Fined in Other Countries for Preaching Against Homosexuality
A "Hate Crimes" bill being proposed in the United States Congress, which proponents say could be used to prosecute violence against certain groups, such as homosexuals, members of certain religious groups, and members of certain races and religions, could actually be used to attack Christians, an expert said today. Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute said a similar state law has been used to send a grandmother in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to jail for sharing her faith on a public street corner.Janet Folger, a columnist for the conservative news service WorldNetDaily.com, called the proposed bill, the "most dangerous bill in America." She is also President of Faith2Action, which has launched an advertising campaign concerning the proposed bill.
According to the Library of Congress website, the purpose of the bill is to provide Federal assistance to states, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes and for other purposes. According to a copy of the proposed bill, it is necessary because of violence against certain groups, such as homosexuals, members of certain religious groups, and members of certain races. According to the bill, it is also necessary because existing law does not adequately address the issue, and members of persecuted groups often have to cross state lines to escape violence.
Under the bill, the United States Attorney General could provide technical, forensic, prosecutorial, or any other form of assistance if an incident constitutes a crime of violence, constitutes a felony under state, local, or tribal laws, or is motivated by prejudice based on race, color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, or is a violation of state, local or tribal hate crime laws.
The bill provides for penalties from 10 years to life imprisonment, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, such as whether or not bodily injury or death was caused, or sexual abuse, or kidnapping occurred.
Comments
This is a great article. Please check mine out also: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/737229/exposing_bogus_hate_crime_legislation.html?cat=17
Noway
(Guest)
(Guest)
11/23/2007
Jeff your a turd
Dr. Jillian T. Weiss
(Guest)
(Guest)
04/29/2007
The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting freedom of speech" - but does this bill punish speech? No, it punishes intent - mens rea - which has always been an element of crime since before the Revolution. Do you know the definition of assault in most states? It requires "serious bodily harm," like a broken arm - otherwise, it's a misdemeanor, and do most police departments and courts take them seriously? No - they get plea bargained down, as do 95% of criminal cases. Because communities can't afford to bust the budget by investigating every crime.
But targeting people for assault because of minority status targets the whole minority community, unlike an ordinary assault. 8,000 reported incidents last year targeted minority communities. http://www.fbi.gov/page2/april06/hatecrimes041006.htm And since it is well known that the FBI stats are underreported, it's probably more like twice or three times that.
If it was your family they were after, you'd ha
Thank you for your comments Jaleh. I have no plans to quit writing and will continue to do so. The only thing that would make me stop doing this writing is if I found other writing I enjoyed as much for more money, and I don't expect that to happen. I used to do a lot more non-news articles, and I may return to that, because the editors are a lot more selective about news (I can understand why), and I don't like several of my stories not published or a rare one being published for no pay. I don't write just to be published. My articles were almost never not published until I did things other than the news, and I am going to go back to some of that after next week. My articles will still be here, however. Thanks again for your kind comments.
Love your articles! This was an interesting read. Continue to write so I can enjoy my life in reading them.
I had not given the issue much thought myself, and at one time might have supported such a law until I read the comments by others. I personally detest violence against any group. I personally would hate language that would call for violence against any group. However, in other countries such laws have been used to prosecute pastors for speaking against homosexuality. As the article pointed out, a state law was used to prosecute a Philadelphia grandmother for sharing her faith. I am also against such nonsense as that, especially when there are existing laws to prosecute violence against any group.
One might wonder...are those opposed to legislation against hate speech against it because they speak hate? Makes sense to me...
Comments 1 - 7 (of 7)
|
|