 |
          
  |
|
|
Reuters
relays the official press release.
Our friends at FRC point out that the fact that the Obama Administration
is willing to spend millions of dollars on a LGBT program in the midst of
recession shows where it’s priorities lie.
HT:
FRC
Harry
Reid (D-NV) has filed on the Department of Defense funding bill which contains
the dangerous hate (thought) crimes expansion legislation. This means that the full Senate could vote
very soon on dangerous hate crimes legislation that threatens religious freedom
and the constitutional principle of “equal justice under law.” It’s also an insult to our brave troops
fighting overseas to sneak such controversial social engineering into troop
funding legislation.
Call
both
your senators today and urge them to vote against hate crimes!
Also,
sign FRC’s petition against hate
crimes.
HT:
FRC
While
the nation is consumed with health care “reform” and the war in Afghanistan,
Congress today snuck through special “protections” for sexual orientation in
the Department of Defense funding bill. Once
the Senate approves this bill, sexual orientation will be a protected status
under Federal hate (thought) crimes law.
The AP
reports.
Such
hate crimes legislation threatens religious freedom because it could be used to
prosecute motives, and it threatens the principle of “equal justice under law”
because it creates special protections based solely on sexual behavior.
See
how your representative
voted on hate crimes expansion (NOTE: a “yes” vote is against hate crimes
expansion and a “no” vote is for expansion).
Congressman
Mike Pence (R-IN) spoke out
against the shameful tactic of attaching such controversial social policy to an
essential Defense funding bill (which our troops in Afghanistan desperately
need). See the video here.
The
Politico reports. The
AP also reports on mounting opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)
which prevents activist judges from exporting “gay marriage” from states that
recognize it to states that don’t.
ABC News reports that
Congressman Barney Frank is pushing legislation that would force employers to accommodate
homosexuals and cross-dressers. Despite
supposed religious exemptions in the legislation, this bill would force many employers
to legitimize sexual behavior that they might find offensive or inappropriate.
As
if there was any doubt that the radical homosexual agenda is completely
incompatible with religious liberty, World Net
Daily’s report that a man is suing a Bible publisher because certain
passages of Scripture disturb his mental state (i.e. conscience) should dispel such
doubts.
The
Politico reports on the effort of liberal members of Congress to repeal the
Defense of Marriage Act. With the recent
indications that the Obama administration would like to see the law overturned,
this development represents a serious threat to traditional marriage in
America.
The
Hill reports that several senators have introduced legislation that would
require businesses to accommodate and legitimize many forms of sexual deviancy
in the work place. Similar legislation in
several states has allowed male cross dressers to enter women’s restrooms. Although fighting workplace discrimination
always sounds good, ENDA would pose a huge threat to religious liberty and
public safety.
Richard
Cohen explains. Excerpt:
The real purpose of hate-crime laws is to
reassure politically significant groups -- blacks, Hispanics, Jews, gays, etc.
-- that someone cares about them and takes their fears seriously. That's nice.
It does not change the fact, though, that what's being punished is thought or
speech. Johns is dead no matter what von Brunn believes. The penalty for murder
is severe, so it's not as if the crime is not being punished. The added
"late hit" of a hate crime is without any real consequence, except as
a precedent for the punishment of belief or speech. Slippery slopes are
supposedly all around us, I know, but this one is the real McCoy.
hat
tip: FRC
On
Thursday, July 16, the Senate voted on an amendment by Sen. Leahy which added
dangerous and unnecessary hate crimes legislation to a Department of Defense funding
bill. See how
both your senators voted on adding this hate crimes amendment to defense
spending legislation.
Thank
your senators if they voted “No,” and if they voted “Yes” respectfully share
your disappointment. You should also
keep this vote in mind the next time your senators face reelection.
UPDATE: Here's the vote tally. Follow the link to see the vote details.
Senate
Vote on the Leahy Amendment (S.A. 189) to add hate (thought) crimes legislation
to the Dept. of Defense funding bill
July 16, 2009
Full Results
|
|
|
Yeas
|
|
Nays
|
|
PRES
|
|
NV
|
|
Republican
|
|
5
|
|
28
|
|
—
|
|
7
|
|
Democratic
|
|
57
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
2
|
|
Independent
|
|
1
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
TOTALS
|
|
63
|
|
28
|
|
—
|
|
9
|
As the New
York Times reports, the Senate has passed into law dangerous hate crimes
legislation into a Defense Department funding bill. Excerpt:
The Senate has agreed to expand the
definition of hate crimes to those committed because of a victim’s sexual
orientation and gender identity as part of a Pentagon policy measure that is
becoming a magnet for tough social issues.
Ironically,
President Obama has threatened
to veto the bill because it sets aside funding for the new state-of-the-art
F-22 Raptor fighter jet.
FRC
explains why “hate crimes” laws are a threat to religious freedom.
The
Caucus blog of the New York Times reports.
Excerpt:
Senate Democrats said on Monday that they
would seek to broaden the federal hate crimes law to protect victims of attacks
based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disabilities.
To lift the chances of passage, Democrats
said the legislation, known as the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act,
would be attached as an amendment to the annual defense authorization bill – a
must-pass measure.
Senator
Orin Hatch (R-UT) published a helpful analysis
and criticism of the hate crimes bill in The Spectrum. Excerpt:
The House passed a hate-crimes bill on
April 29, and a similar bill has been introduced in the Senate. Both would
create a new federal crime for willfully causing bodily injury (or attempting
to do so) because of the victim's actual or perceived "race, color,
religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or
disability." A person unfamiliar with the hate-crimes debate reading these
provisions would likely respond by asking, "Wait, isn't that already a
crime?" At that point, they'd officially be one step ahead of the
proponents of these bills.
. . .
Both bills introduced this year would also
expand the definition of a hate crime to cover offenses motivated by a victim's
"gender identity."
At best, this legislation unnecessarily
intrudes on the efforts of state governments and creates crimes that are
impractical, if not impossible, to prosecute. At worst, it would be
unconstitutional.
Also, while both bills ostensibly prohibit
prosecution for any activities that are protected by the First Amendment, the
fact that they punish certain motives on the basis of political and social
viewpoints calls their constitutionality into question.
Read
Hatch’s full
analysis here.
The
Boston Globe reports. Repealing the
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) would allow judges to easily impose same-sex
marriage on states that do not recognize it.
By pushing to repeal DOMA, Massachusetts is forcing its “values” on the
rest of the nation.
CitizenLink reports. Excerpt:
President Barack Obama opened the White
House to hundreds of gay activists Monday, promising them that by the time he
leaves office they would "have pretty good feelings" about his
administration.
During an event to celebrate the 40th
anniversary of what gay activists consider the launch of their political
movement – several nights of violent riots in and around a New York gay bar –
Obama rattled off several policies he plans to implement to please his
homosexual constituency.
"I want you to know that I expect and
hope to be judged not by words, not by promises I've made, but by the promises
my administration keeps," he said. "We've been in office six months
now. I suspect that by the time this administration is over … you guys will
have pretty good feelings about the Obama administration."
Among those promises the president is
pursuing, he said: Overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act, passing a
law to mandate health-care and other benefits to homosexual domestic partners,
repealing "don't ask, don't tell" and even "rescinding the
discriminatory ban on entry to the United States based on HIV status."
OneNewsNow also
reports.
Robert
Knight explains. Excerpt:
Among its many defects, the proposed
federal hate crimes bill virtually ensures that some defendants will face
double jeopardy, whatever the outcome of their cases. It all depends on the
whims of the folks occupying the Attorney General’s office, who may want to
score political points at a defendant’s expense.
The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention
Act (S. 909) now before the Senate, establishes “thought crime,” violates equal
protection by making some victims more important than others, elevates “sexual
orientation” and “gender identity” to be equivalent to civil rights categories
like race, and greatly expands the federal role in criminal law.
In short, it’s a grab bag of ways to
violate genuine constitutional rights while addressing a non-issue. There is no
compelling evidence that bias-motivated crimes are not being handled properly
and perpetrators punished.
Keep
reading the full
article here.
Tony Perkins explains
at Human Events. Excerpt:
Kevin Jennings has neither the temperament
nor the ethical standards needed for public service. His history suggests a
commitment to serving only one narrow part of the student population, not all
students. He is unfit for the post to which he’s been assigned, and Secretary
Duncan should withdraw his appointment at once.
The
President of the Family Research Council submitted
excellent testimony to a recent Senate committee held to discuss hate
crimes legislation. Excerpt:
Hate crime laws force the court to guess
the thoughts and beliefs which lie behind a crime, instead of looking at the
crime itself, in order to prosecute and convict someone of a hate crime.
Violent crimes are already punishable by law. "Hate crime" laws put
the perpetrator's thoughts and beliefs on trial. Hate crime laws are tantamount
to federally prosecuting "thought crimes." The Family Research
Council believes that all crime should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of
the law, and that every violent crime has some form of hate behind it. All
around the country, crimes are being prosecuted in the state justice systems.
American justice is being done. There is simply no need for a federal hate
crimes law.
CitizenLink reports. Excerpt:
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., sent a
letter to key leaders in the religious community asking them to oppose the
bill.
"Please tell your congregation this
legislation is not about 'hate' (all violent crimes are hateful); it is about
taking away your freedom to speak and preach biblical truth," DeMint
wrote. "It will take away your right to say that some things are wrong. We
need millions of Americans to call and email their Senators, especially Democrat
Senators who are pushing this legislation."
OneNewsNow
reports. Excerpt:
"The crimes that took place [Tiller
murder and Holocaust Museum shootings] have absolutely nothing to do with the
content of the hate crimes bill, which only really is focusing on the special
treatment and special privileges of protection to be granted to people because
of their homosexuality or transsexual status," he contends.
Dacus adds that "the bill is not about
providing equal treatment -- it's providing unequal treatment," which he
believes is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the United States
Constitution.
"The hate crimes bill accomplishes
nothing except to intimidate and silence legitimate, peaceful opposition to the
never-ending demands of the gay and transsexual activists," he concludes.
CitizenLink reports. Excerpt:
The commission [U.S. Commission on Civil
Rights], not known for being on the side of social conservatives on policy
issues, has an ally in Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C. He pointed out that hate-crimes
legislation fundamentally changes the idea of equal justice under law to
arbitrary justice based on the race, religion or sexual orientation of the
victim or the criminal.
"It really forces our courts and our
judges to begin to anticipate what people were thinking when they committed a
crime, rather than whether they committed the crime or not."
But he said the worst part of the
hate-crimes bill is it could restrict free speech, "because if a pastor
stands up and preaches that the Word of God says that homosexuality is wrong,
that pastor could be accused of hate speech and could even be accused or
charged with inducing someone to commit a crime against a homosexual."
Urge
your member
of Congress to oppose hate crimes!
Also, visit FightHateCrimes.com
to find out how you can help oppose this dangerous threat to religious freedom
and “equal justice under law.”
Click here
to view the Democrat press conference in support of hate crimes.
The
Washington Post reports. As
does Fox News. Excerpt:
The extended benefits include an option for
employees' domestic partners to be added to a government insurance program that
pays for long-term conditions, such as Alzheimer's disease. They also would be
allowed to take sick leave to care for a sick partner or non-biological child.
CtizenLink
explains how the action threatens traditional
marriage and the rule of law.
Excerpt:
Family advocates say Obama’s action is a
direct violation of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and a big step toward
redefining marriage.
“The president thumbed his nose at the rule
of law and continues to undermine marriage as society’s most pro-child
institution,” said Tom Minnery, senior vice president of government and public
policy for Focus on the Family Action.
CitizenLink reports. The following excerpt quotes Ashley Horn of
Focus on the Family Action:
"As we've seen in other nations where
such laws are passed, they can have a chilling effect on the free speech of
those who would simply share from the Bible God's views on issues such as
homosexuality," she explained. "Hate-crimes laws are unnecessary in a
civil society like ours based on the rule of law.
"All crimes are hate crimes," she
added, "To give special status to certain groups of people allows courts
to reach beyond punishing people for the illegal acts they commit and judge
them for what they may or may not be thinking as they commit those acts."
Our
sources on the Hill assure us that Congress will try to push hate crimes
through before the August recess. Hate
(thought) crimes are a tool of legitimizing sexual deviancy and offering
special legal benefits based on sexual behavior. It also poses a serious threat to religious
liberty and “equal justice under law.”
Call
your
representative today and urge him or her to vote AGAINST dangerous and unnecessary
“hate crimes” legislation!
The Southern
Voice reports. Apparently proponents
of expanding hate (thought) crimes protections to “actual or perceived” gender
identity and sexual orientation are concerned about conservative backlash to
dangerous hate crimes legislation.
According to the homosexual activist group HRC, hate crimes legislation
could be sneaked into other legislation as an amendment. This hate crimes bill would endanger
religious liberty and also violate the constitutional principle of “equal
justice under law,” and must be opposed by vigilant and active citizens.
Our
friends at NRLC have warned
members of Congress of the dangers of the State Department Funding Bill,
H.R. 2410, which would seek to overturn abortion restrictions in other nations
as a matter of official U.S. policy.
As
we’ve reported in the past, this bill also raises concerns over the promotion
of the homosexual agenda overseas.
CitizenLink reports. Excerpt:
Two years ago, the United Kingdom passed a
law that forced adoption agencies to consider placing children with homosexual
couples. An exemption that protected religious groups has just expired, forcing
several faith-based adoption agencies to close rather than violate their
convictions.
Not
long after his embassy staff in Iraq held a gay themed party in Baghdad,
President Obama has declared an official “Lesbian,
Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month.” It is not known if these “gay pride” events
were coordinated intentionally to coincide with his Middle East tour.
| | |