In America — you read that right — your (religious) thoughts can now be criminalized


Today, the Senate voted to expand hate crimes legislation….the House has already passed a similar bill, so this gross attack on free speech and thought will soon be moving to Obama’s desk!

Very cynically, the Senate hate crimes legislation, which couldn’t get passed on its own account, was inserted into the Defense Spending bill and passed today.

From WND:

A key Senate vote during the wee hours when most Americans were asleep has added the so-called “hate crimes” plan, which creates federal protections and privileges homosexuals and others who have chosen alternative sexual lifestyles, to a defense spending bill.

While there are procedural hurdles yet, opponents say they expect the proposal that essentially makes homosexuals a protected class of citizens in the United States soon will reach the desk of President Obama, who has lobbied for it.

The Senate passed the bill 63-28 with all but five Republicans voting against it.

From AP, about the bill:

People attacked because of their sexual orientation or gender would receive federal protections under a Senate-approved measure that significantly expands the reach of “hate crimes” law. The Senate bill also would make it easier for federal prosecutors to step in when state or local authorities are unable or unwilling to pursue those acts deemed to be hate crimes.

 Senate Democrats insist the hate-crimes amendment (S. 909) they attached to the defense appropriations bill won’t criminalize preaching or speaking out against homosexuality.

But Republican Senator Jim DeMint sees it differently:

But Sen. Jim DeMint said that since opposition to homosexuality is “a biblical concept,” the measure could “serve as a warning to people not to speak out too loudly about their religious views lest the federal law enforcement come knocking at their door.” The South Carolina Republican asked, “Can priests, pastors, rabbis be sure that their preaching will not be prosecuted?

More:

Opponents of the bill, including conservative religious groups, argued that it infringes on states’ rights and could intimidate free speech. “The bill could potentially imperil the free speech rights of Christians who choose to speak out against homosexuality – which could even be extended to preaching against it,” The Christian Coalition of America said in a statement.

Supporters countered that prosecutions under the bill can occur only when bodily injury is involved, and no minister or protester could be targeted for expressing opposition to homosexuality, even if their statements are followed by another person committing a violent action.

To emphasize the point, the Senate passed provisions restating that the bill does not prohibit constitutionally protected speech and that free speech is guaranteed unless it is intended to plan or prepare for an act of violence.

Of course, a few weeks ago, the Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder, saw it quite differently when asked if preachers would be protected under this bill….his answer was NO!

From WND on July 3:

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder says a homosexual activist who is attacked following a Christian minister’s sermon about homosexuality would be protected by a proposed new federal law, but a minister attacked by a homosexual wouldn’t be.

The revelations come from Holder’s recent testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which was taking comments on the so-called “hate crimes” proposal. It also was the subject of discussion on talk radio icon Rush Limbaugh’s show today.

“This is the question,” Limbaugh said. “[Sen.] Jeff Sessions [R-Ala.] presents a hypothetical where a minister gives a sermon, quotes the Bible about homosexuality and is thereafter attacked … by a gay activist because of what the minister said about his religious beliefs and what Scripture says about homosexuality. Is the minister protected?”

No, said Holder.

“Well, the statute would not – would not necessarily cover that. We’re talking about crimes that have a historic basis. Groups who have been targeted for violence as a result of the color of their skin, their sexual orientation, that is what this statute tends – is designed to cover. We don’t have the indication that the attack was motivated by a person’s desire to strike at somebody who was in one of these protected groups. That would not be covered by the statute,” Holder stated.

So, basically, in other words, only blacks and those whose are sexually confused are covered under this law!!!!!!!!! 

More of Rush Limbaugh’s take on this:

Continued Limbaugh, “In other words: ministers and whites are not covered by the hate crime statute because we’re talking about crimes that have a historic basis, groups who have been targeted for violence as a result of their skin color, sexual orientation. So hate crimes are reserved exclusively for blacks and homosexuals. Everybody else can get to the back of the bus on this one. “

Oh…and just so you know, those who risk and sacrifice their lives for our freedom are not a “protected class” according to AG Eric Holder:

Under questioning from Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., Holder admitted that “hate” was involved in a recent case in which a Muslim man attacked and killed a U.S. soldier. Still, soldiers are not among the protected classes.

“There’s a certain element of hate in that, I suppose,” Holder admitted, leading Coburn to conclude, “What we’re willing to do is elevate those crimes (verbal or physical attacks on homosexuals) over this very intended hate crime (a murder.)”

Coburn is right on…

As far as I am concerned, the Democrats can lie and act like this law will not allow prosecutions of pastors and those of faith….and they can act as if this is some sort of “civil rights” issue, but when the most powerful attorney in the country can approve of certain groups as the “protected class”, then I believe that we are leaving up to (perhaps political) judges to determine whether our thoughts and beliefs are crimes or not.

That is not America and it wipes out our First Amendment rights….How anyone can determine that this legislation is “fair” or “justice” is beyond me.  

Folks, our America is quickly turning into something we won’t recognize….a bunch of fringe, elitist liberals have taken the reigns of our country and the concepts of unalienable rights and freedom don’t seem to be in their vocabulary…unless to be used for politically motivated purposes.

What may happen when this bill becomes law?    Mark Steyn believes we continue a march to “soft despotism”..just look up to what has happened in Canada….From Mark Steyn, who has spoken many times on the same type of legislation that has prosecuted Believers in Canada:

 Jim DeMint speakson the appallingly drafted “hate crimes” legislation whose language opens all kinds of doors, most of them unconstitutional. Senator DeMint also references various advances in “thought crime” from Europe and Canada, most of which will come as no surprise to readers of my posts in the Corner. On the one hand, it’s good to see them raised on the floor of the United States Senate. On the other, the fact that they need to be raised in the Senate at all is a bleak comment on the remorseless march of soft despotism.

6 Responses

  1. “Hate Bill” Favoritism

    If “hate bill”-obsessed Congress can’t protect Christians from “gays” as much as it wants to protect “gays” from Christians, will Congress be surprised if it can’t protect itself from most everyone? If “hate bills” are forced on captive Americans, they’ll still find ways to sneakily continue to “plant” Biblical messages everywhere. By doing so they’ll hasten God’s judgment on their oppressors as revealed in Proverbs 19:1. (See related web items including “David Letterman’s Hate, Etc.,” “Separation of Raunch and State,” “Michael the Narc-Angel,” and “Bible Verses Obama Avoids.”) Since Congress can’t seem to legislate “morality,” it’s making up for it by legislating “immorality”!

  2. Unfortunately, this is not surprising. We have a government now that is controlled by people who tell us we cannot think or act for ourselves because we are too stupid and too bigotted. So mama and papa government are necessary to step in and protect us for ourselves. Reality–just one more step in the constant march of Democrats to take control of every aspect of our lives. I guess we better blog quickly before that becomes a crime.

  3. Mk –
    or perhaps we should continue blogging fast and furiously before the healthcare bill is passed and signed.

    Of course, we then may get carpal tunnel syndrome from the furious key tapping….and the government likely won’t cover us for treatement because we are conservative bloggers!
    Since their are race preferences for Medical School freebies in the bill, I’m sure it is not a huge step to assume the 1000+ page bill has rationing for conservatives!
    Ya think?

    Thanks for reading!

  4. I’m sure to get blasted for this one, but Bush did far worse to this country than this bill has/could/will do. No, it’s not a good thing for the religious right, and it seems to be a bit of overkill, but the United States is the most homophobic nation on earth. Ask anyone in Europe, Asia, Australia, and even Africa. The USA is perceived to be harshly anti-gay. So, as has happened throughout history, the pendulum has swung in the other direction, and to the extreme. This will anger some, but will in the long run lead to better rights for gay people. Study history closely and you will note this is a consistent pattern. In time things will settle back to their rightful place in the center. Should the religious be protected when preaching hate? Well, it depends. If someone intentionally seeks to incite violence, then that isn’t a right to begin with, and so this bill doesn’t take anything away from them. But if someone wishes to teach that homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible then they have a responsibility to teach that others do not feel the same way, and that the Bible is clear that we should never harm another human being. All judgment is left to God, not to us. This bill will help certain people be careful with what they say – more careful – which truly is something that we need. Should the government have gotten involved and created a federal bill for this kind of thing? In most cases it should not have, but in this case we are still in the very early stages of gay rights, and the violence has not abated. The cause of gay rights today is somewhat similar to where the civil rights movement was in the mid-60s (some protection, but still long way to go). People aren’t naturally going to stop themselves from committing violence when they are told from childhood that gay people are filthy, so in this one particular case I can say that this bill was the right thing to do.

  5. Dov,
    It is quite a judgement on your part, in and of itself, to compare the struggle of blacks in the civil rights movement to gays.
    There is no comparison. Blacks are humans and were not treated as such and deserved to be treated as anyone else…which they now are. Gays have all of the same rights that I do….and have not been suppressed like blacks were.

    Why is it a “worse” crime if someone murders a gay than if they murder a white man? Answer: it isn’t. That is why “hate crimes” legislation is dangerous. It says that some classes of citizens are worth protecting more than others….and that just isn’t true.

    Many gays have an agenda and that is to force those of us who don’t agree with their lifestyle to endorse their immoral behavior.

    The founders of this country fought for the freedom to worship as we see fit. The Bible has been around a lot longer than the radical fringe homosexual/deviant movement.
    Those of us who believe the Bible are free, and must remain free, to preach and discuss what the Bible says about homosexuality.
    It is an abomination before God and I don’t intend to
    “be careful about what I say” (your words) about homosexuality.

    Your comments are completely based on the fact that you’ve decided for EVERYONE that homosexuality is to be respected and condoned.

    If you are free to say that the Bible is wrong….I am free to say that it is right….get over it. Constitutionally, I can not be forced to think otherwise, which is what this bill is about….and what you advocate.

    Funny, how you and those who think like you do can’t see the irony in that.

  6. Dov,
    One other thought….

    As a Christian, I also believe that if someone wants to be homosexual, more power to them.

    That doesn’t mean it’s not a sin and it doesn’t mean it has to be flaunted and force upon us all.

    Along the same lines, you are free to think what you like, but I am free to disagree and not be forced to “be careful what I say” for fear of insulting you or anyone else.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 252 other followers

%d bloggers like this: