Apostolic Friends Forum - Preaching truth a hate crime???

Apostolic Friends Forum (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)

- Deep Waters (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - Preaching truth a hate crime??? (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=8097)

Preaching truth a hate crime???

Read it for yourself...

http://www.afa.net/hatecrime2.asp

Isn't this horrible? The craziest thing you've ever heard?

Your responses are welcome.....

Apostolics are in a FOG.

They think this stuff will only happen in obscure liberal places but a rude awakening is coming.

living out here will give you a reality check as to what is to come

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thad (Post 247749)

Apostolics are in a FOG.

They think this stuff will only happen in obscure liberal places but a rude awakening is coming.

living out here will give you a reality check as to what is to come

Uh...no, us "apostolics" are very much aware that this is happening right here in our back yard....many of us just get ignored for pointing these things out or are called hate mongers by the liberals

There is absolutely no way a bill would pass that would make it illegal to say something is immoral.... None...

not even homosexuals would support a bill that would do that...

There are bills about hate speech, but they have more to do with the kind of thing that happened to Mathew Shepard than a preacher saying that it is immoral to be gay but people should be allowed to live thier lives without fear of being killed/beat up/kicked out of public places for the way they choose to live thier lives that harms no one but themselves...

Quote:

Originally Posted by redeemedcynic84 (Post 247930)

You really don't think homosexuals advocate this bill?

sad that America would get herself in the shape she is in...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas (Post 247956)

You really don't think homosexuals advocate this bill?

do they advocate the bill? Probably...

But the bill is not making it illegal to preach that homosexuality is immoral...

some info on the bill from other sources (the one you cited is EXTREMELY biased):

http://www.hslda.org/Legislation/Nat...05/default.asp

Quote:

(2) It could ultimately lead to prosecution for thoughts and restrictions on free speech and religious liberty. Although H.R. 1592 prosecutes only “acts of violence” and does not prosecute expressions or opinions, it opens the door to examining the thoughts of not only a criminal, but everyone with whom he may have come into contact. An overzealous prosecutor could turn a criminal prosecution into a political correctness prosecution. Broadly written hate crimes bills in other states and countries have been used to restrict the freedom of politically incorrect and unpopular speech. This bill could be used to advance the politically correct agenda in this country by providing greater protections for certain classes of people. Future legislation could expand these protections and place restrictions on religious liberty and free speech.

(3) It is unnecessary. Recent FBI statistics show that crimes motivated by hatred or bias against a trait of the victim are decreasing. Furthermore, many states already have a hate crimes law and there is no evidence that the states are failing to prosecute hate crimes. States which do not have hate crimes laws still prosecute the crimes under existing criminal laws. A federal bill hate crimes bill would only increase the control and scope of the federal government.

This site is biased, too, thankfully they tell the truth about it... This bill DOES NOT make saying something illegal...

It makes it a more serious crime if you beat someone up because they are gay and call them "gay slurs" while you do it...

You cannot be prosecuted under this bill if you do not commit some act of violence in conjunction with your speech...

http://www.hatecrimesbill.org/
Some excerpts of the bill (the entire thing is there if you follow the link):

Quote:

(1) The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem.

(2) Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive.

(3) State and local authorities are now and will continue to be responsible for prosecuting the overwhelming majority of violent crimes in the United States, including violent crimes motivated by bias. These authorities can carry out their responsibilities more effectively with greater Federal assistance.

(4) Existing Federal law is inadequate to address this problem.

(5) A prominent characteristic of a violent crime motivated by bias is that it devastates not just the actual victim and the family and friends of the victim, but frequently savages the community sharing the traits that caused the victim to be selected.

(6) Such violence substantially affects interstate commerce in many ways, including the following:

(A) The movement of members of targeted groups is impeded, and members of such groups are forced to move across State lines to escape the incidence or risk of such violence.

(B) Members of targeted groups are prevented from purchasing goods and services, obtaining or sustaining employment, or participating in other commercial activity.

(C) Perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence.

(D) Channels, facilities, and instrumentalities of interstate commerce are used to facilitate the commission of such violence.

(E) Such violence is committed using articles that have traveled in interstate commerce.

(7) For generations, the institutions of slavery and involuntary servitude were defined by the race, color, and ancestry of those held in bondage. Slavery and involuntary servitude were enforced, both prior to and after the adoption of the 13th amendment to the Constitution of the United States, through widespread public and private violence directed at persons because of their race, color, or ancestry, or perceived race, color, or ancestry. Accordingly, eliminating racially motivated violence is an important means of eliminating, to the extent possible, the badges, incidents, and relics of slavery and involuntary servitude.

(8) Both at the time when the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution of the United States were adopted, and continuing to date, members of certain religious and national origin groups were and are perceived to be distinct `races'. Thus, in order to eliminate, to the extent possible, the badges, incidents, and relics of slavery, it is necessary to prohibit assaults on the basis of real or perceived religions or national origins, at least to the extent such religions or national origins were regarded as races at the time of the adoption of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

(9) Federal jurisdiction over certain violent crimes motivated by bias enables Federal, State, and local authorities to work together as partners in the investigation and prosecution of such crimes.

(10) The problem of crimes motivated by bias is sufficiently serious, widespread, and interstate in nature as to warrant Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes.

Quote:

SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF HATE CRIME.

In this Act--

(1) the term `crime of violence' has the meaning given that term in section 16, title 18, United States Code;

(2) the term `hate crime' has the meaning given such term in section 280003(a) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (28 U.S.C. 994 note); and

(3) the term `local' means a county, city, town, township, parish, village, or other general purpose political subdivision of a State.

Please show me where in any of that saying "homosexuality is immoral in the eyes of God and will send someone to hell" is going to send someone to jail... Quite frankly, I think the people who killed Mathew Shephard (the bill is named in his honor) SHOULD have worse penalties for what they did because thier intent DOES make it worse.... It makes it hurtful to everyone, nationwide, who is or has a loved one who is a homosexual, and that is a big deal...

Look at what race crimes did in the 50s, 60s, and early 90s (and I'm sure at other times, too)...

just like you can't do things to people because of thier race, you can't commit violent acts against people because of thier sexual orientation, that is all this bill is doing (plus its also doing the same for race, gender, etc.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by redeemedcynic84 (Post 248007)

some info on the bill from other sources (the one you cited is EXTREMELY biased):

http://www.hslda.org/Legislation/Nat...05/default.asp

This site is biased, too, thankfully they tell the truth about it... This bill DOES NOT make saying something illegal...

It makes it a more serious crime if you beat someone up because they are gay and call them "gay slurs" while you do it...

You cannot be prosecuted under this bill if you do not commit some act of violence in conjunction with your speech...

RC is correct. The proposed law does stipulate a crime which "constitutes a crime of violence under federal law or a felony under state, local, or Indian tribal laws."

Summary of legislation. Text of legislation.

In order to be prosecuted under this proposed law one would have to be committing an act of violence. There are proposed stipulations as well that specify 1st Amendment protected activities like free speech are not even under consideration.

Like most "hate crime" laws I think this law is problematic because it creates protected classes of people. Someone can attack me but it's not a Federal offense if all they wanted was my wallet. Then the local cops don't even investigate.

Someone in one of the protected classes gets mugged and they get the assistance of the FBI to track down their attackers. Where's the justice?

How about laws that simply state it's wrong to violently attack another human being? We don't care what's going on inside your head. We don't care about issues that you had as a child during toilet training. We only want to know, did the cops catch the violent bad guy? Yes, or no.

We got him/her? Good, lock 'em up.

The separation of church and state being what it is there is no way this bill
in its present form would keep homosexuality from being preached against in
our churches.