Welcome to PatsFans.com

Pastors could be prosecuted for “conspiracy to commit a hate crime”

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DisgruntledTunaFan, Apr 17, 2009.

  1. DisgruntledTunaFan

    DisgruntledTunaFan In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Messages:
    2,534
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Anti-Christian ‘Hate Crimes’ Vote Expected Wednesday, April 22

    Anti-Christian ‘Hate Crimes’ Vote Expected Wednesday, April 22

    April 17 , 2009 – Washington, DC –Two weeks ago, Traditional Values Coalition Executive Director Andrea Lafferty warned supporters that a vote on the so-called hate crimes bill would take place the week of April 20th. TVC had learned that Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) and Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) would quietly re-introduce the so-called hate crimes bill--H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.

    It is now expected that on Wednesday, April 22, the full U.S. House Judiciary Committee will vote on H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.

    The so-called hate crimes bill will be used to lay the legal foundation and framework to investigate, prosecute and persecute pastors, business owners, Bible teachers, Sunday School teachers, youth leaders, Christian counselors, religious broadcasters and anyone else whose actions are based upon and reflect the truths found in the Bible.

    H.R. 1913 broadly defines “intimidation. A pastor’s sermon could be considered “hate speech” under this legislation if heard by an individual who then acts aggressively against persons based on any “sexual orientation.” The pastor could be prosecuted for “conspiracy to commit a hate crime.”

    During Committee markup in 2007, Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL) admitted that the legislation will not protect a pastor from prosecution.

    Traditional Values Coalition is calling on supporters to contact their Members of Congress to oppose H.R. 1913, the so-called hate crimes bill.
     
  2. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,923
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +252 / 8 / -12

    Bye Bye !st amendment.

    Courtesy of the party of tolerance...
     
  3. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,877
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +43 / 6 / -0

    Oh please, try actually reading the bill.
     
  4. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,358
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +717 / 2 / -9

    If Martin Luther King were alive does this mean he would go to Jail again.

    Conyers is a "Racist Dog"
     
  5. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,923
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +252 / 8 / -12


    I took you advice and read the bill I don't see the basis for a conspiracy link based on speech. However I also see NO reason for this bill. It basically adresses violent crimes that are already against the law. The law is pointless just a piece of feel good legislation to pander to special interest groups.


    If a violent crime is committed the perp should be prosecuted and thrown in jail. The motivation should not matter.


    Let's say 2 people are assulted, both suffer a broken leg and 3 facial bruises of equal seriousness. Person A was gay, perp a get a 15 year sentence due to punishment provisions in a hate crime law. Person B was just a regular schmuck and perp B gets a 5 year sentence under an assult law. IMO person B was not afforded equal protection under the law. It is unconstitutional IMO to afford more protection under the law for someone based on the motivation of the criminal.
     
  6. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    I agree. Hate crime legislation is bullsh!t and unconstitutional.
     
  7. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,877
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +43 / 6 / -0

    But a violent crime directed towards an individual on the basis of race, religion, gender or disability doesn't just victimize the person being physically attacked. It's deliberately meant to intimidate and oppress an entire group of people in a given community. It's no different than an act of terrorism, which carries more weight than other crimes.

    While the valdiity of Hate Crime laws is one argument, it's a whole other argument that these religious fundamentalists try to make every time with Hate Crime legislation. They spread fear and hysteria by lying about what is in the bill. I worked in an office that passed similar legislation about 2 years ago and it was the same thing, a bunch of propaganda being spread by the hard right and certain religious leaders about how the Bill was going to be able to prosecute them simply for standing up and ranting against gays, which wasn't even remotely true.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2009
  8. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,877
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +43 / 6 / -0

    How is it unconstitutional?
     
  9. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,923
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +252 / 8 / -12


    I disagree, my rights to redress my grievences are equal to anyone elses regardless of the motivation of my assilants. How do you determine what is really going on in the mind of a particular perp? Do we really know if T Bundy discriminated against a particular victim.

    I believe in equal protection under the law not defined vitim classes.



    this may be due to people seeing that once a law is passed it takes on a life of it's own and is exapnded way beyond the original claims of the authors.

    Do you work in the political process?
     
  10. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,877
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +43 / 6 / -0

    This isn't even remotely true. We have different charges based on motivation already: aggravated assault, premeditated murder etc. that's what "degrees" are for (i.e. 2nd degree murder).

    The burden of proof is insanely high to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the victim was deliberately targeted on the basis of religion, gender, race etc. It's another complete lie that if a white guy mugs a black guy he's going to be prosecuted for a hate crime. You have to get a ton of evidence showing that the accused deliberately attacked the person for those reasons. There's zero speculation involved.


    It's not possible with this type of legislation, the requirements for prosecution are very specific. Regardless, that doesn't change the fact that they are lying about what is in it to people in order to drum up opposition.

    I used to.
     
  11. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Precisely. My understanding is that the only possible constitutional challenge to hate crime legislation is via the first amendment and free speech (that must drive the totalitarians nuts). But if the speech is judged to be harmful or deleterious, then it's not protected (yelling fire in a crowded theater).
     
  12. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,923
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +252 / 8 / -12



    In the hypothetical case I presented the crimes were identical, while no 2 crimes are ever the same in the real world,IMO for a crime of identical severity the punishment should be identical, that is what equal protection under the law means to me. The law shoudl not be an instrument of discrimination.


    Indeed as your answer above shows there are different charges based on the severity of crime. Given the ways we can identify the severity of the crime, specifing that a crime of a particular severity should be treated differently based on the race, sexual orientation, or what ever other victim status is discrimination pure and simple. Some citizens (those not assigned to a designated victim group) are discriminated against.

    We have laws to punish crimes based on the viciousness of the crime, designating victim groups and discriminating is wrong.
     
  13. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,877
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +43 / 6 / -0

    Not only that, but they aren't being charged for their speech, they're being charged for the action. The speech is a piece of evidence.
     
  14. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,877
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +43 / 6 / -0

    One crime targets the person being physically hurt. The other crime targets the person being physically hurt and the community to which they belong. It's meant to intimidate and instill fear. Just like the victims of terrorist attacks aren't getting preferential treatment over the victims of regular murders because we consider terrorism to be a bigger crime.

    It is not punishing based on the gender, race, religion etc. of the victim. It is punishing based on the motivation of the assailant. There's a huge difference there. A white guy mugging a black guy isn't going to get charged with a hate crime because the victim is black. A white guy who is a member of the kkk, tells his friends he's gonna attack blacks, and then unprovoked, goes and attacks a black guy while yelling racial epithets is going to be charged with a hate crime because his motivation was to intimidate and target an entire community of people.
     
  15. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,923
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +252 / 8 / -12




    We will agree to disagree, unless the crime is done publicly so other member of the 'victim' group vitness the crime and understand it is targeted at them also this is just bs imo.

    Of course terrorism when committed by a group for a political purpose is an act of war not a crime.
     
  16. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    SELECTIVE PROSECUTION.

    All other things being equal, why should the murderer of a straight man be given a lesser sentence than the murderer of a gay man? I don't give a damn what was said during the murder or whether the motivation was.

    Also, on a philosophical track, was the gay man's life worth more than the straight man's?
     
  17. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,969
    Likes Received:
    196
    Ratings:
    +424 / 12 / -26

    Were the actions of McVeigh and Nichols an act of war???
     
  18. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Lots of Republicans who are soft on crime ITT. ;)
     
  19. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,877
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +43 / 6 / -0

    Who are they selectively prosecuting based on their race, gender or religion? Nobody. This isn't a case of selective prosecution at all.

    Is the life of someone who was murdered premeditively worth less than the life of a person murdered by a drunk driver? No. Punishment doesn't assign value to the life of the victim, it assigns culpability to the perpetrator.

    If a gay man is murdered for the same reason as a straight man, or a black man is murdered for the same reason as a white man the crime and punishment is the same.

    If a gay man is murdered because he is gay that's a different motivation than if he is murdered because he was being robbed. The punishment is largely similar BTW, but it's a different crime and the symbolism of making that distinction is important for a society that seeks to protect minority groups from fear and intimidation.
     
  20. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,923
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +252 / 8 / -12


    Were they member of a group looking to attack to US?
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>