 |
          
  |
|
|
The Alliance
Defense Fund is defending a college student in Georgia who was told she must
change her beliefs on homosexuality or leave school. This reveals how the homosexual agenda is not
about equality or discrimination but rather forcing their radical secular morality
on others. Religious freedom has no
place in this agenda.
Robert
George explains. Excerpt:
So what do progressives think? Has the
president embraced bigotry? Or has he lied to the American people about his
position on what marriage is and how it should be defined?
On either side’s account, the dispute over
the nature and meaning of marriage is profoundly important. Those who seek to
redefine marriage to include same-sex or even polyamorous relationships believe
that the historical definition of marriage as a male-female union denies people
who incline toward other forms of sexual partnership equality and fundamental
rights. Those who defend the historical definition — I am one of them — believe
that redefining marriage will further erode public morality and weaken the
already battered institution of marriage.
So if the president is lying, he is lying
about something that really matters. It is no innocent fib (like Robert Gibbs’s
fib that the president did not bow to the Saudi king).
So which is it? Is the president a bigot or
a liar?
Last
Wednesday a federal court in California heard closing
arguments in a lawsuit seeking to overturn the state's recent voter-enacted
constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage. This is an attempt by radical liberal
activists to subvert the democratic process and force their radical
anti-marriage agenda on the citizens of California.
Maggie
Gallagher comments. Excerpt:
This is the trial that never should have
been, by a judge who has systematically telegraphed his sympathy for one side.
The lawyer for the plaintiffs is Ted Olson,
once a GOP advocate for judicial restraint. Yet this week, he will be pleading
with the judge to nullify the votes of 7 million Californians -- and, by
extension, the votes of millions of Americans in other states who have
exercised their right to vote for marriage as the union of husband and wife.
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.
During
the presidential campaign, then-Senator Barack Obama said America’s reputation
in the world (particularly in the Muslim world) had been gravely tarnished and
promised to improve our nation’s image abroad if elected. Perhaps the Obama administration’s public
relations outreach to Muslims needs a little work. The
Washington Post reports that the U.S. Embassy in Iraq recently held a party
in which participants were encouraged to dress in drag or come as their
favorite homosexual celebrity. Though it
comes as no surprise to see the Obama administration promoting “alternative
lifestyles,” the administration's decision to hold a gay party in the heart of the
Middle East seems somewhat ill-advised.
Matt
Barber explains. Excerpt:
This underscores the fact that all
hate-crimes laws, both state and federal, inarguably advance
"unequal" protection of the laws. This flies in the face of the 14th
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Congressman
Mike Pence (R-IN) proposed an amendment to the Foreign Service reauthorization
bill which would have eliminated mandates that require the State Department to
promote the radical homosexual agenda overseas.
Unfortunately the amendment was defeated. Congressional
Quarterly reports (article for subscribers only). Excerpt:
Mike Pence, R-Ind., who said that the
language would prioritize gay rights over other issues, offered an amendment to
strike the language and replace it with a broad statement of support for
universal human rights that did not mention sexual orientation.
“I oppose mandating that our secretary of
State, diplomatic and consular staff promote a gay-rights agenda around the
globe, over and above other issues,” Pence said.
The amendment fell on a voice vote.
Congressman
Chris Smith (R-NJ) also proposed a pro-life amendment which would have ensured
that the innocuous-sounding
“Office for Global Women’s Issues” contained in the bill would not have
promoted abortion. His amendment
was also defeated.
There
is grave concern over how proposed legislation designed to reauthorize funding
for the State Department would promote the homosexual agenda on marriage and hate
crimes and could lead to promoting abortion world-wide. The bill would mandate special benefits for
homosexual members of the Foreign Service and Peace Corps and for their “domestic
partners.” It would also establish other
pro-homosexual policies, and could even lead to the promotion of abortion as a “woman’s
right” as part of American foreign policy.
CitizenLink also
reports.
Please
contact both
your senators today and urge them to oppose the hate crimes bill (S. 909)!
Dangerous
hate (thought) crimes legislation will soon be
considered in the Senate Judiciary and then the full Senate. Expanding hate crimes to include “actual or perceived
gender identity or sexual orientation” would allow the government to prosecute
people for their thoughts opening up dangerous threat to religious freedom,
free speech, and “equal justice under law.”
And
if that wasn’t bad enough, it appears that pedophilia and many
other disturbing practices could be considered “sexual orientations” protected
by hate crimes law.
Our
friends at FRC have a website where you can get involved to fight hate crimes.
Contact
your senators today!
Reuters
reports. And CitizenLink reports
on how the bill establishes a special legal status for homosexuals. Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) voiced
his concerns that the bill “could have a chilling effect on the religious
expression and the religious freedom of millions of Americans.”
See
how your representative voted on this dangerous bill here.
Thanks
to all who contacted their representatives on this issue! Stay involved as this bill now heads to the
Senate.
David
Limbaugh explains. Excerpts:
Homosexual activists aren't easily
deterred. Unable to persuade even the people of California to change the
definition of marriage to legitimize their lifestyle, they're resorting to a
backdoor approach to accomplish the same thing: pushing federal hate crime
legislation while few are paying attention.
…
“…I think the main purpose of this bill is
to demonize and criminalize thought, especially the politically incorrect
belief that homosexual behavior is either abnormal or sinful. It is to make an
emphatic societal statement that this belief constitutes "hate" and
possibly to lay the groundwork for outlawing speech expressing this belief,
including from the pulpit.”
 Today the House Judiciary Committee considered dangerous hate crimes legislation which would add additional penalties to crimes based on the motivation of the criminal. This legislation poses a serious threat to religious freedom and equal rights.
AdvanceUSA staff attended or watched much of the hearings today. Democrats on the committee claimed the bill posed no threats to religious freedom because the bill only deals with violent crime, and compared the move to include sexual behavior as a protected status similar to the protections against crime motivated by race. Republicans pointed out the nebulous nature of many of the categories labeled in the legislation, and made the case that the bill would take action against “thought crimes” because it adds penalties based solely on the perpetrator’s perceived motivation.
Several amendments were proposed which would have attempted to clarify the definitions, speak the truth about the nature of the bill, or try to mitigate the danger to religious freedom and free speech. These substantive amendments were rejected.
The House Judiciary Committee postponed a vote on the hate crimes bill until 10:00am Thursday (April 22). If the bill passes committee, which is likely, concerned citizens will need to contact their representatives and urge them to oppose any expansion of hate crimes.
Matt
Barber explains why the hate crimes legislation now in the House Judiciary
Committee is so dangerous. Excerpt:
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) and Rep. Mark Kirk
(R-IL) have quietly re-introduced the federal thought crimes bill, H.R. 1913,
the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. As has proved to
be true in both Europe and Canada, this Orwellian piece of legislation is the
direct precursor to freedom killing and speech chilling “hate speech” laws. It
represents a thinly veiled effort to ultimately silence – under penalty of law
– morally, medically and biblically based opposition to the homosexual
lifestyle. The bill is expected to be marked up Wednesday before the full House
Judiciary Committee.
Concerned
Women for America has issued a
helpful press release on the dangerous hate crimes legislation being considered
by the House Judiciary Committee tomorrow.
It shows how the hate (thought) crimes bill would create a “caste system
of victims,” with some being more equal than others.
OneNewsNow
also reports on the danger this bill holds for religious freedom.
 The Christian Post reports that Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) has announced that the House Judiciary Committee will consider dangerous “hate crimes” legislation that would endanger religious freedom and would create special rights based solely on sexual behavior. Such hate crimes constitute punishing people for their thoughts and should rightly be called “thought crimes.”
CitizenLink reports on one specific example of a Christian being persecuted for holding traditional Christian views on homosexuality under the guise of hate prevention. A Christian in Britain lost his job for answering truthfully about his personal beliefs regarding homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Excerpts:
A charity worker has been suspended after telling a colleague about his Christian beliefs on homosexuality, the London Times Online reported.
…
Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst at Focus on the Family Action, said the incident highlights what's beginning to show up in America.
"Where laws granting special rights to homosexuals bump into religious freedoms and freedom of speech, religion and speech lose," he said. "Christians are being bullied into silence simply for voicing disagreement with the homosexual agenda."
Call your representative today and urge him or her to oppose any expansion of hate crimes legislation, especially when based on homosexuality or “transgender orientation.”
Correction: This article originally indicated that Rep. Frank was a member of the House Judiciary Committee. This is incorrect. He is not a member of the committee, but is a co-sponsor of the legislation and was likely one of the first to announce that the bill would be considered in committee.
The
Washington Times reports. Excerpt:
Democrats in the Iowa legislature killed
efforts Thursday to bring the gay marriage issue to the ballot, rejecting the
pleas of hundreds of demonstrators who flooded the state Capitol in a bid to
get legislators on the record for one battle in a same-sex marriage war brewing
for the 2010 elections.
The
Union Leader reports. What happened
in Colorado is now happening in New Hampshire.
Under these laws, cross dressing men can use the same bathroom as your
wife and daughter. Many liberals would
like to see these kinds of “bathroom bills” enacted in other states and
nation-wide.
AdvanceUSA
has learned that liberal groups have begun pushing for so-called “hate crimes”
legislation which would create special privileges based on sexual behavior,
violate the constitutional principle of “equal justice under law,” and would
pose a subtle threat to religious freedom since “hate crime” and “hate speech”
laws have often been used to prosecute Christians for lovingly proclaiming
Biblical truth regarding sexuality. It is
possible that hate crimes legislation could be discussed in Congress soon after
the Easter recess.
Call your
representative and both
your senators and urge them to oppose any legislation that expands hate
crimes laws!
The
Hill reports that the US Congress will soon be facing legislation designed
to undermine the traditional definition of marriage and offer special unequal
privileges based solely on sexual behavior.
My Way News
reports. Unfortunately, name-calling
and intimidation are common techniques used by so-called “gay rights”
proponents such as Barney Frank. Anyone
who raises objections to elements of the homosexual agenda is isolated and
disparaged. A video clip of the
interview can be viewed here.
Alan
Sears of Exodus International explains.
Excerpt:
No sooner had he finished speaking of his
fellow Americans in his inaugural address as a people who “have chosen hope
over fear [and] unity of purpose over conflict and discord” than his staff
posted, on the White House Web site, a virtual declaration of war against those
who oppose the demands for special rights and privileges by those who engage in
homosexual behavior.
|
|
|
| |