Unlawful 'Hate Crimes' Bill

[Guest lorad474@cs.com]

How can legislation be 'unlawful'?

When it's anti-constitutional.

 

Question number two:

Why do Democrats want to impose stalinist speech control?

 

For educational purposes:

"Democrats Sneak "Hate Crimes" Bill into Crucial Defense Bill

LifeSiteNews.com July 13, 2007

 

Would hold US troops fighting "War on Terror" as hostages in exchange

for sweeping "hate crimes" legislation

 

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 13, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Senate Democrats

will hold US troops fighting the "War on Terror" as hostages in

exchange for sweeping "hate crimes" legislation if the Senate votes

this week, perhaps as early as Monday, to include it in the defense

spending bill.

 

Instead of introducing the legislation giving sexual orientation "hate

crimes" protection as a separate bill, Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and

Gordon Smith (R-OR) opted to introduce the "Matthew Shepard Local Law

Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act" as one of hundreds of

amendments to the Defense Reauthorization bill requested by President

Bush.

 

"There's no question this is an attempt to sneak the bill in under the

most shameful circumstances because they are attaching it to the

defense of our military troops," Mat Staver, founder of the Liberty

Counsel told LifeSiteNews.com.

 

Sens. Kennedy and Smith's strategy, Staver said, forces the President

into a terrible dilemma: President Bush must either approve "hate

crimes" legislation or veto the entire spending bill thus leaving US

troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan without new support and

dwindling resources. Since the President has no line-item veto,

approval of the defense bill is an all or nothing deal.

 

"This is an underhanded ploy by liberals in the Senate to try to force

Bush to sign dangerous hate crimes legislation into law," said Matt

Barber, policy director for cultural issues at Concerned Women for

America (CWA). "I would suspect that [bush] would send this back to

the Senate and say 'quit playing games with the lives of our troops'

and have them send a clean bill to his desk to get these troops taken

care of."

 

In May, the US House of Representatives passed H.R. 1592 the Local Law

Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, a bill similar to the Senate

version proposed by Sens. Kennedy and Smith, that would insert "sexual

orientation" and "gender identity" into existing hate crimes

provisions, and give the federal government unprecedented involvement

in local law enforcement.

 

The President had promised to veto any "hate crimes" legislation,

calling the bill "constitutionally questionable." A statement from the

White House said, "There has been no persuasive demonstration of any

need to federalize such a potentially large range of violent crime

enforcement." http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/may/07050302.html

 

Conservative groups have charged that "hate crimes" equals "thought

crimes" and carries major implications for the religious freedom of

Christians and other religious groups who preach homosexual behavior

is intrinsically disordered and immoral. Such fears were confirmed

when Rep. Artur Davis, a supporter of the bill, admitted that under

this law a pastor could be charged with the crime of incitement if the

he preached against homosexuality and a person in the congregation

left church and committed a crime against a homosexual.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/apr/07042601.html

 

CWA's Barber told LifeSiteNews.com that pro-family advocates must tell

their respective senators to vote against the "hate crimes" amendment.

"The grassroots, people of faith, people of conservative values and

principles must be contacting their senators and let them know that

any hate crimes legislation is unacceptable and they need to do

whatever they can to fight this legislation," he said. "

 

Found at http://www.rense.com