Source: Crosstalk 2007-01-17: Hate Crimes Bill (HR254)

From WhyNotWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Heard on Crosstalk 2007-01-17

http://www.crosstalkamerica.com/shows/2007/01/hate_crimes_bill_hr254.php

Host: Jim Schneider
Guest: Michael Marcavage

Contents

[edit] Summary

http://www.crosstalkamerica.com/ :

"Jim, Michael and callers discussed HR254, The Hate Crimes Bill, which currently sits in the judiciary committee. This proposed piece of legislation was introduced on January 5th.

Under this bill, if you commit a crime against a minority, such as a homosexual, then you may be considered guilty of a hate crime. The problem with this logic is that every crime is an act of hate, therefore if this legislation passes, it could end up being used for the criminalization of thought and speech. This may result in the criminalizing of Christians who merely disagree with and speak out against homosexuality."

"... HR254, The Hate Crimes Bill, which will include sexual orientation as a protected group, thus leading to the criminalizing of Christians who merely disagree with and speak out against homosexuality, just as has already taken place in Canada which passed similar legislation."

[edit] 11 Christians arrested for peaceably protesting at a homosexual convention

They mentioned an incident in Philadelphia in 2004: There were a large number of homosexual supporters gathered for some kind of homosexual celebration and Michael Marcavage was there with a group of other Christians, seeking to minister to those under the bondage of homosexuality. They were peaceably singing some hymns and holding signs, not doing anything aggressive against those gathered. Then some people started gathering around and following and harassing these Christians. These Christians ended up being arrested and put in jail for 21 hours and prosecuted under Pennsylvania hate crime law. Fortunately for them, the judge was not of the same opinion as the prosecutor and they were able to walk away. I can't understand how what they did could be considered a crime. If peaceably protesting is a crime, then our nation is in trouble. Some of the charges against them: “criminal conspiracy,” “failure to disperse”. Most puzzling of all to me is that the Christians were the only ones arrested, not any of those that were harassing them.

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/6522/CFI/family/index.htm

Ten adults and a teen-ager who showed up to sing hymns and carry signs peacefully at Philadelphia’s latest homosexual celebration were arrested on Sunday and spent 21 hours in jail.

According to Michael Marcavage, founder of Repent America, which organized the protest, the 11 defendants were charged with three felonies and five misdemeanors, including a “hate crime.” If convicted on all counts, the defendants could face 47 years in prison, he said.

The counts read to them by the bail commissioner included:

1. “ethnic intimidation” (2nd-degree felony “hate crime”).

2. “criminal conspiracy” (1st-degree felony).

3. “possession of instruments of crime” (1st-degree misdemeanor).

4. “reckless endangerment of another person” (2nd-degree felony).

5. “riot” (3rd-degree felony).

6. “failure to disperse” (2nd-degree misdemeanor).

7. “disorderly conduct” (2nd-degree misdemeanor).

8. “obstructing a highway” (3rd-degree misdemeanor).,

The “ethnic intimidation” charge was made under Pennsylvania’s Ethnic Intimidation and Institutional Vandalism Act, the state’s “hate crimes” law, to which “sexual orientation” was added recently as a victim category.

Some of the charges may have been dropped since the defendants were released. Philadelphia Police spokeswoman Officer Maria Ibrahim said the current charges were: “criminal conspiracy,” “failure to disperse,” “disorderly conduct” and “obstructing a highway.” The District Attorney’s office had not returned a call to Concerned Women for America’s (CWA’s) Culture & Family Institute as of press time.

“We’re going to do whatever it takes to ensure that the Philadelphia Police Department and the city are held accountable for this,” Brian Fahling of the American Family Association (AFA) Center for Law and Policy, who is representing the Christians, told CWA’s Culture & Family Institute. “As far as we can tell, this was utterly uncalled for and has no legal justification.”

The group had arrived at about 1 p.m. at the Outfest National Coming Out Day street fair, a music and arts festival celebrating homosexuality that the city helps sponsor with a $22,500 grant.

The defendants, who range in age from 17 to 72, were confronted almost immediately by the “Pink Angels,” a group that blocked them by interlocking their arms, shouting obscenities, and shoving large, pink Styrofoam cutouts of angels in front of them. But the only ones arrested were the Christians, the police confirmed.

“We were on a corner across the street from a stage where a transvestite was performing, and we were singing ‘Blessed Be the Name of the Lord,’” Marcavage said.

Marcavage, 25, said a documentary filmmaker captured the entire episode, using two different camera angles. “I was miked, so all my discussions with the police are recorded,” he said. “We did what they asked, and walked down the street. A few minutes later, the police stopped us and put us in paddy wagons.”

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929

Eleven Christians who were demonstrating at a public homosexual-rights event in Philadelphia have been arrested and charged – they say unjustly.

According to a statement from Life and Liberty Ministries, on Sunday the Christian protesters were "preaching God's Word" to the crowd of people attending the outdoor Philadelphia OutFest event and displaying banners with biblical messages.

Not long after the group began their activity, members of the Pink Angels, which the statement describes as "a militant mob of homosexuals," confronted the protesters and attempted to drown out their message with whistles, while hiding the signs with large sheets of pink Styrofoam.

"Even though the Christians obeyed all laws, city ordinances and lawful requests by the Philadelphia police officers on hand," said Life and Liberty Ministries, "they were promptly and without warning arrested and hauled off to jail, where they spent 21 hours before being released on Monday morning."

[edit] HR254

Read the bill itself:

[edit] Discussion

(What about "conspiring"? Is that a crime under this bill, or just under Pennsylvania hate crime law?)

My thoughts:

I think the very language of the bill -- even its name -- is very biased and will also tend to bias those who read it and hear about it, even without them noticing that they're being biased one way or another. The name of the bill is "The David Ray Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007". Just the name is laden with presuppositions and biases that I don't agree with: That these things that the writers call "hate crimes" are actually crimes, that they actually have anything to do with hatred, and that they need to be prevented. Those who read the bill are likely to subconsciously believe these presuppositions simply because it's stated in the title and the bill as if it were fact. (A further presupposition found in the body of the bill is that sexual "orientation" is something that people are born with, much like people who are born with a tendency and desire to steal or do acts of violence should be tolerated for doing such because "it's in their nature".)
I am bothered, however, by the lack of evidence given. "The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem". It does? What evidence prompted you to conclude that? I see no studies cited that deal with whether this is actually a problem. I don't even see any statistics about the incidence of such violence. Don't get me wrong, such violence may happen from time to time, and I certainly don't condone violence; but the anecdotes of "hate crime" that I've heard of have not seemed like crime to me, but rather as opportunities for homosexual activists to try to take away the freedom of speech of Christians: opportunities to try to silence the voices that condemn the practice of homosexuality as sin. (If someone could please show me some examples of real hate crime, then I might be more inclined to believe it.)
"Such violence affects interstate commerce in many ways, including--by impeding the movement of members of targeted groups and forcing such members to move across State lines to escape the incidence or risk of such violence; and by preventing members of targeted groups from purchasing goods and services, obtaining or sustaining employment or participating in other commercial activity; perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence; instrumentalities of interstate commerce are used to facilitate the commission of such violence; such violence is committed using articles that have traveled in interstate commerce;" Huh?? What are you talking about, Ms. Jackson-Lee??

"Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability of any person [...]."

Nearly quote:

It's the language that they use -- the word "perceived" -- that makes this bill especially dangerous.

Nearly quote:

This law will criminalize those who based on what they say. It's unconstitutional. It's an attack against our freedom of speech, against our First Amendment rights.

Paraphrase:

It tries to make something a crime based on people's motives. Well, how do they know what our motives are? It sounds like these legislators are trying to introduce "thought police" into America.

My thoughts:

Next they'll be trying to make hatred itself a crime! They will need to install surveillance cameras throughout our homes and wiretaps on our phones -- no, better yet: just implant a thought-monitoring chip in our brains! -- so that they can monitor us and prosecute us at the first signs of hateful thoughts. Hello 1984! You didn't realize it would take until 30 years after 1984 for these things to happen, did you, Orwell?
Why just hatred? Why not prohibit prejudice, greed, lust, and pride while you're at it?
I don't like hatred, don't get me wrong. But I think we should have the freedom to hate people if we want. Don't make laws about what we should think or not think.

Paraphrase:

The idea that we don't already have enough legislation in place against crime is ridiculous. This bill is unnecessary and dangerous. We already have laws against crime, and judges and juries to interpret the law in each individual situation, possibly taking motives into consideration at that point. But someone's perceived motive in doing something shouldn't be the main factor in deciding what is crime and shouldn't be part of legislation.

My thoughts:

Why should there be a law concerning violence *for a perceived motive* (the perceived motive being hatred against certain groups)? :Why not just have laws against the violence itself and call that enough? It shouldn't matter for what reason it is done: violence should be a crime. I think we can all agree on that, right? But this matter of perceived motive, that is very difficult to judge. :One may think it's because of hate, but how can one know? Is it fair to assume that there is hatred just because the "agressor" is of a different race, sexual orientation, religion, etc. from the "victim"? I don't think that's a good idea. And also, who's to say that differences in/attacks against, say, religion, will be protected as well as differences in sexual orientation (the real reason for this bill)?

Caller:

This caller mentioned a couple Bible texts that came to mind and that convince her that this bill is a sign that the end is near. She didn't mention where in the Bible it was found but here are some of the things she mentioned: somewhere in the Bible where it says that sinners will contradict even themselves; somewhere where it says that men will call good evil and evil good.

.

Caller: So if somebody molested a child and then I or someone spoke against that, could we be prosecuted just for speaking against that?
Caller: Because maybe they had an "inborn" [disposition] (sexual orientation) to predispose them to such behavior.
Reply: What if they had a disposition to do sexual acts with animals? ... or siblings?
Reply: The liberals are trying to make it illegal to speak out against sexual deviancy...

.

[Leida] (caller): These people (liberals/homosexuals) are constantly fighting for equality and now they're trying to pass a bill that makes them better than everybody else.
[Leida] (caller): What if a homosexual kills a heterosexual?
Marcavage: Well, there is that word "religion" in the wording, so it could be assessed in that regard (me: meaning that it could be regarded as a hate crime because of the heterosexual's religious convictions, which are presumably different from those of the homosexual's?), but for the most part, if someone kills, say, their grandmother, this law will not be equally assessed (in other words, it probably wouldn't be considered a hate crime), and therefore this law is unconstitutional.

Paraphrase:

The liberals don't want to be reminded of their sin. So they call it "not sin" and legislate to make it so (me: that is, to try to force everyone else to believe as they do).

Liberals are attacking Christians in whatever manner they can. They mentioned how Nancy Pelosi believes "Christianity is the greatest danger to America". They mentioned how people have been quoted to say "So many Christians... so few lions."

I couldn't find any quotes where Pelosi said such a thing, but I did find this comment, for what it's worth:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1762733/posts

I love these headlines. They paint Pelosi as just minding her business, doing good to the American People and along comes those evil right-wingers, who just loathe Grandma Pelosi for no good reason.
Actually, it's Nancy Pelosi, who loathes everything about traditional America. She loathes the GOP. She loathes Christians. She loathes heterosexual breeders. She loathes football. She loathes the military. She loathes American victory. She blames America for everything wrong in the world.

Another disturbing incident:

Some pastors in Canada were apparently thrown into jail because they called homosexuality a sin... even though they emphasized that they loved the sinner while hating the sin.

Bottom line: We need to keep sharing our faith. Even if they pass laws against it.

Retrieved from "http://whynotwiki.com/Source:_Crosstalk_2007-01-17:_Hate_Crimes_Bill_%28HR254%29"
Personal tools