What You Can Do About "Hate Crimes" Legislation

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97238

Want to try to make a difference? Want to forget about having a Big Mac meal for a day or those couple of Starbuck's coffees? Then check out the link above and consider sending ALL our US Senators a letter asking for them to vote against the current Hate Crimes (S.909) legislation. You will notice that this legislation establishes “special status” for crimes against a protected class – essentially making them out to be different from any crime against a group that is not defined in the legislation. This not only makes crimes against those of us who do not fit into the defined group less “criminal” but creates unique and stiffer penalties for crimes against these protected classes.

I am certain that if you are beaten by a person breaking into your house, you want them prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If you are a homosexual or transgender, that penalty is likely greater than that of the aforementioned victim. It is therefore discriminatory and goes against the very constitution we presume we are bound under.

In addition, Section 7 of the Hate Crimes Acts definition indicates both real and PERCEIVED offenses as being defined in the crime against a person who is under this protected class. Perception simply is not an empirical way to define a crime. You are perceiving my writing as you read this at the moment! And I dare say that each of the people reading have very different perceptions of this legislation and of my commentary. Would you want that view established in a court of law when you are being judged by that perception?

Read the arguments of the Republicans in the House as you consider your own actions:

· Rep. Virginia Foxx (R, NC) said HR 1913 will open a new category of “thought crimes” in America, moving us “down a slippery slope” to loss of freedom. She said such has happened under hate laws in Canada and Europe.

· Rep. Trent Franks (R, AZ) warned HR 1913 will end equality in America, giving special rights to federally favored groups such as homosexuals.

· Rep. Roy Blount (R, MO) echoed Foxx’s admonition that hate laws have taken away free speech in Canada and Europe.

· Rep. Steve King (R, IA) repeated the warning of his amendment in Judiciary last week, saying pedophiles and many other deviants will obtain special rights and protection under HR 1913.

· Rep. Mary Fallin (R, OK) referenced loss of free speech in Canada and Great Britain but also how the “Philly 11″ Christians were persecuted under Pennsylvania’s hate law.

· Rep. Foxx returned, saying a federal hate law would preempt the 10th Amendment which delegates most law enforcement to the states. She said the claim that Matt Sheppard was murdered because he was a homosexual was a “hoax;” he was killed, she said as the victim of a robbery.

· Rep. Louie Gohmert (R, TX) charged HR 1913 will divide America into groups of more favored versus less. He again cited USC Title 18, Section 2a, the foundation of HR 1913, which says anyone who through speech “induces” commission of a violent hate crime “will be tried as a principal” alongside the active offender. He said there is no “epidemic” of hate in America.

· Rep. King cited the American Psychiatric Association which lists 547 different kinds of paraphilia, or sexual deviancies. King said all of these would merit special federal protection under the class “sexual orientation” enshrined in HR 1913.

· Rep. Foxx testified, “This bill itself will spread fear and intimidation.” She was referring primarily to Christian/conservative critics of homosexuality, Islam, illegal immigrants, etc. Such critics from the pulpit or airwaves would be increasingly silenced under the hate law’s chill on free speech.

· Rep. Hastings (D, FL), a proponent of the hate bill, brazenly agreed that HR 1913 would give a galaxy of sexual perverts special protection. He said that under hate bill protection they will not “live in fear because of who they are.”

· One particularly striking argument was made by Rep. Randy Forbes (R, VA). He said if Miss California had slapped the homosexual judge who derided her on the stage (and across the internet) under HR 1913 she could be indicted as a “violent hate criminal,” facing a possible 10 years in prison. But, Forbes said, if the homosexual judge had slapped her, she would have had no special protection under HR 1913. His act would have been simple assault, a misdemeanor.

· The testimony of Rep. Todd Akins (R, MO) was also unique. He said HR 1913 would actually increase hate in America. He said the American people, including young people, recognizing that they are now second-class citizens, with homosexuals receiving special federal rights, can only resent (hate?) those who have rights and privileges above them. He also said that with the legal system already backed up, the federal hate law will create havoc within our legal system, requiring judges to also become “psychologists,” divining motives of offenders.

· Rep. Mike Pence (R, IN) said the FBI statistics show that, far from hate crimes increasing, they have steadily declined over the past 10 years. There is also no evidence that states are lax in hate law enforcement.

· Democrat testimony concluded with a special entry, followed by CSPAN camera, of Rep. Barney Frank (D, MA). He pooh-poohed the arrest of the Philly 11 Christians in 2004, saying that, although it was unjust, Republicans were irresponsible in not pointing out that the Christians were acquitted. Fortunately, Rep. Gohmert had the last word, indicating that the very fact that persons can and have been arrested for speech under state laws has a chilling effect on free speech. Gohmert tried to send the hate bill back to Judiciary for amendments but was overridden.

It is now time for all who love freedom to turn their full attention to defeat of the hate bill in the Senate, where Sen. Edward Kennedy just yesterday introduced his federal hate bill, S. 909, which is certain to be moving rapidly to a vote.