The Mounting Threat Of STATE Hate Laws

heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee . . .


that was a good one, Boss . . .

Conservative Black Pastors Fight Bill on Hate Crimes
Conservative Black Pastors Fight Bill on Hate Crimes
At Issue Are Sermons Against Homosexuality

By Hamil R. Harris
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 28, 2007; Page B09
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/27/AR2007042701899.html

A coalition of conservative African American pastors is lobbying Congress to vote against a bill that would extend federal hate-crimes laws to cover gays, saying they fear it would prevent them from preaching against homosexuality.

Several pastors last week urged House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), a sponsor of the bill, and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus to vote against the proposed Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

They say it would pin the hate crime label on their sermons against homosexuality, which they consider a sin.

"This bill will offer a status for gays, lesbians and transgender people under the equal protection status that can muzzle the black church," said Bishop Harry R. Jackson Jr., pastor of Hope Christian Church in Lanham and founder of the High Impact Leader Coalition. "This law can be applied in the way that can keep the church from preaching the Gospel."

Gay activists compare the bill to civil rights legislation of the 1960s.

"This legislation is needed because gay, lesbian, bisexual individuals are not protected under the law," said Bishop Kwabena "Rainey" Cheeks, pastor of Inner Light Ministries in the District and a member of the Human Rights Coalition. "Right now, people are being fired, being attacked on the streets, and we want the same civil rights protections as others have in this country.

The Rev. Marvin Winans, a Detroit pastor and member of the Grammy Award-winning Winans family, met with Conyers on Tuesday to lobby against the bill. "This is a specific bill, no matter how well intended, that will hurt America," he said.

Among the groups opposing the bill are the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the Family Research Council and Exodus International, a coalition of formerly gay Christians. The Unitarian Universalist Association, Integrity USA and the NAACP support the bill.

Despite the controversy, some of the most prominent pastors in the African American church are silent on the issue.

"In the church where I grew up, there wasn't a don't-ask-don't-tell policy," Winans said.

Phil Pannell, a longtime gay activist in the District, said he believes African Americans should be more understanding about discrimination toward gays.

"African Americans, more than most people, should know what it means to be a target," he said.

When did defending acts of hate become part of Christianity?

Well folks, I never thought the day would come, but now the law has been accepted in the House of Representatives, and will go for a full vote next week! If you're against it call, write & email your congressman. also see http://truthtellers.org and http://traditionalvalues.org and http://www.stophatecrimesnow.com/ (hear it from the black grandmas who were arrested for similar singing & reading)

Discretely worshipping and reading your bibles can land you in jail if fully passed, with a year sentence in federal prison for doing nothing else. However, if you're caught also intimidating or "persuding" , (even if they only FEEL intimidated) for someone to think you're biased against a federally protected elite social group you'll land yourself even more time in Federal Prison! This is exact precise reality folks, and your record will forever say you were convicted of a hate crime for anything that can be twisted into such as above.

Above is a related story, but I think it may be too late.

I just hate being persuded.

Michael,

I just read the bill.

It only covers crimes of violence... such as



Why are Christians so adamant that someone who "willfully causes bodily injury" to others be protected?

What ever happened to "turning the other cheek"?

Those grandmothers are a riot...

You missed the clause "any disorderly conduct" which in the definition included as I listed already at length with any persuasion OR any situation where the group or person can 'feel' intimidated, which will land you one year in federal prison. (yes it also can be used for crimes of violence and this is how the ADL is getting it covertly passed as a major investment of theirs and future money maker for their business).

That was under the less restrictive state laws. This federal bill will make it many times more restrictive of speech such than as with the singing & worshipping grandmas. Would you care to see nearly all our elderly locked up for having their own beliefs?

The text of the bill is here.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.1592:

Would you like to show me where the phrase "disorderly conduct" appears?

The only objection that a Christian could have to this bill-- is that they want the right to cause bodily injury to people they don't like.

It is indeed ironic that the group pushing that legislation is the one who always uses the race card and complains about being oppressed.
I guess they do not believe in doing unto others as you would have them do unto you.

I think their main objection is the right to freedom of speech.

Do we really want to call something "hate speech" and prosecute anytime someone speaks against homosexuality?

Shouldn't people have the right to voice their views no matter how unpopular or misguided we think they are?

What is the point of freedom of speech if we only allow popular speech?

The bill in question has absolutely nothing to do with Freedom of Speech.

It has to do with violent crimes (i.e. murder, beatings, bombings and arson). I am making the assumption that you agree that violent crimes are not a form of speech.

I am very zealous of free speech rights to the point of defending speech that many here would find inacceptable. In my opinion, you can say whatever you want to whomever you want. You are legally and constitutional protected no matter what you say (of course you aren't protected from people saying nasty things right back).

But I have never seen the term "hate crimes", in either legislation or in legal decisions that didn't involve someone being killed or badly hurt.

Let's keep the two issues separate.

E_brown's point is well taken, and it is the one that Michael and his ilk are sure to lie about. The "grandmothers" were not arrested because they hate "homos" and shouted rude remarks to them during their block party--they were arrested because the created a public nuisance and were blocking traffic--i posted a link to their own petition to the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania against the Governor, Legislative Officers, et all, in which they describe the charges against them.

And such laws are not about restricting legitimate freedom of speech. They are about incitement to criminal activity--as Mr. Justice Holmes put it, freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. These laws restrict the right of lunatics, whether religious lunatics matters not, from using hate speech to incite others to crime.