Nov 14, 2006

"Senator-Elect" will seek expansion of Federal Hate Crimes Law


The "link" above speaks volumes and needs no further commentary from me, but just remember you get what you vote for!!!

5 comments:

Dan Colgan said...

I have no problem with Hate Crimes Legislation: as long as we define a "hate crime" correctly.

A "Hate Crime" is any crime committed because all crimes are injustices against the human society's foundation of civilized law. All crime should be punished, all crime should be classified as HATE CRIME

David Bowie said...

Conservative--I couldn't agree more that "hate crime" must be correctly defined, however given the fact that the LIBS have now taken control of the U.S. Congress, the likelyhood of this happening is quite remote.

Human nature being what it is, ALL crimes are motivated by hate, and has nothing to do with an individuals sexual orientation, but you and I both know that the opposition as well as the "Democratic Leadership" (note the quotation marks) will be pushing for the inclusion of sexual orientation and/or gender identification to any form of "hate crimes" bill that is introduced in the 110th Congress.

Emily said...

The police (not the “thought Police”) are not going to arrest you on your thoughts, or intent. That’s the Holy Spirit’s Job. These people need the Lord! If they pass the “hate crimes” bill you will be guilty until proven innocent. This will violate your freedom of conscious, expression, and thoughts. This is just a scapegoat, to avoid the real problem. Which is “the moral decay in our society”, trying to look at things amorally, instead of morally!

Diane Gramley, you go girl!

Emily said...

PS. If we already have litigation for all the crimes, why do we need "Hate Crimes"?

David Bowie said...

Emily--"Thought police" is exactly what the homosexual activists in America want. They are not the least bit interested in our freedom of conscience, expression or thought, only the advancement of the twisted and perverted agenda, and, excuse my language, the hell with anyone who disagrees. BTW, have you read any of the so-called "hate crimes" legislation that is floating around? If not, I have, and the key words are "actual or perceived." An actual act is one thing, but how do you determine what a "perceived" act is? By any rule of Law that I understand this is virtually impossible, but you won't convince the homosexual activists of that simple fact And just for the record, I agree that so-called "hate crimes" legislation is completely unnecessary, because the current anti-discrimination laws that are on the books are more than adequate to deal ethnically motivated offenses, and even those predicated by an individual's "orientation."