Matthew Shepard, at age 21, died as a result of homosexual prejudice. Some say that it was justified, even provoked, but the hate crime committed by two local college students in Laramie, Wyoming, was not in any way justifiable, regardless of their victim's race, gender, sexual orientation, or form of lifestyle. The story of this tragedy follows.On October 6, 1998, the two culprits tied Shepard to a broken fence, severely beat him, robbed him, and left him to die of exposure near the outskirts of Laramie. Eighteen hours later a young college student, on a bike ride, discovered Shepard's near lifeless body and phoned the Laramie police from the nearest home. Shepard was taken, immediately, to the local hospital where he was diagnosed and transferred immediately to Fort Collins, Colorado for special treatment. His fatal wounds included a skull fracture that extended from the back of his head to the top of his right ear, hypothermia, and a severe amount of blood loss. His parents, Dennis and Judy Shepard, were there at the hospital with him until October 12, the day that he died.
On October 12, 1998, the city of Laramie, Wyoming was turned upside down as reporters from across the nation informed the world of Shepard's death. Picketers from both sides of belief, in many communities around the US, responded to this social controversy by flooding their local streets and marching in protest against each other. The reaction to Shepard's death was almost sickening to see. It is hard to imagine that anyone, regardless of their religious belief or personal viewpoints on homosexuality, would honestly want to see an innocent citizen die because of his/her sexual orientation, race, or gender. Though many attended Shepard's funeral with sincere sympathy, some also came in vengeance to speak out against the lifestyle that Shepard was killed as a result of.
Based on 200 interviews with those in connection to Laramie and the Matthew Shepard case, The Laramie Project was created. Both a great tribute to the life and legacy of Matthew Shepard and an informative documentary of the events that led up to and followed Shepard's death, this movie is a must see. Released in 2002, this movie has embarked on subject that is still too easily ignored and ridiculed in the United States. This terrible tragedy should not be looked over, rather it should open the eyes of our nation to the continuing social problem that still raises prejudice children and allows more opportunities for hate crimes to happen. In opposition to the view point of the structural functionalist, hate crimes do not serve a positive function in society, they degrade groups of people and destroy families and communities. It is ignorant to not become informed on social issues like this, please take the time to watch this movie and share opinions, questions, and concerns regarding it.
4 comments:
Hey Michelle! Impressive post, and I think everyone should consider seeing this documentary. Great blog!
I saw this film a couple weeks ago, and I definitely agree that it is worth seeing! They did a really good job of objectively presenting a variety of viewpoints and making sure that each side was fairly represented, and I found myself being both challenged and educated.
The murder of Matthew Shepard was definitely motivated (it appears) by hatred against homosexuals. It is hate crime at its worst. No doubt about it. Violence like this is absolutely sickening!
Having said that, I would like to express my opinion that so-called "hate crime laws" are NOT the solution to hate crime! Please let me explain, because I'm afraid most people aren't even aware of some of the strong opposition against these bills ... if they're even aware of the bills' existence at all! (It doesn't seem like the major media corporations are too interested in reporting about things like this.) I hope people won't simply assume "hate crimes = bad, therefore hate crime bill = good" without at least considering some of the opposition to these bills.
First of all, for clarification, the bill that I am referring to is
H.R. 1592, the "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007" (and now the "Matthew Shepard Act") (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1592 / http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1592.html ).
I had been under the impression that H.R. 1343/S. 625, the "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2001" (1343/625) were the bills I should be watching, but it appears that 1592 is actually a much more current bill. (One site says that H.R. 1343 was reintroduced by Rep. John Conyers on March 20, 2007. Another says that H.R. 1343 is "being resurrected in the House for a vote this fall". So I'm a bit confused. But maybe 1592 is just the new incarnation of 1343...)
It looks like H.R. 1592 is apparently up for vote in the House THIS WEEK!!! (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55348)
(There is also H. R. 254, The David Ray Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_254.html and http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.254.IH: ) )
Okay, these hate crimes bills may appear innocent enough at first glance -- after all, who ISN'T opposed to violent hate crime? But I would urge people to look beyond the admittedly agreeable TITLE of the bill, to actually read the bill itself, and to consider what the implications of passing legislation like this could be.
I've been following the topic of hate crimes for a couple months now (mostly by listening to the daily talk-radio program "Crosstalk" (12:00 on 90.1 FM for those who are interested) and reading the news site http://www.worldnetdaily.com/) and I am very concerned. Here are some of the things I've come across, so that you can see why I am so concerned...
""[W]hat you may not know is how this bill scheduled for a vote in the House this week will come after pastors and all those who disagree with the homosexual agenda out loud. H.R. 1592, the so-called "hate crimes" bill, isn't about hate. It isn't about "crimes" (there are already stiff penalties against crimes); it's about _speech_."" (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55348)
I propose the possibility that such legislation might do as much to TAKE AWAY people's freedom of thought and speech as it will do to PROTECT minorities from discrimination (not that I'm opposed to protecting minorities!). It will overly protect one group of people while causing another group to be wide open to attacks and vulnerable to discrimination.
Do you think that a crime that normally carries a sentence of 3 1/2 years should become punishable with _30_ years just because the defendant shouted an anti-homosexual name at his victim? I don't. Now I surely don't condone discrimination or name-calling (!) , but last time I checked, name-calling wasn't a crime deserving 26 1/2 YEARS in prison! (I'm not making this up! Please read http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55392)
""Here's a question: Which is worse? Actions or words? Robbing someone or calling him a mean name? Which one deserves the greater penalty?
Before you answer, let's say the name was really mean [...]. [T]here ought to be stiff penalties for something like that. Stiff like 23 years behind bars? I don't think so. But the state of New Hampshire does.
"" (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55348)
"If passed, this legislation will provide special legal protections for homosexuals--and even cross-dressers and transgenders--as a minority class under federal law." (http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=519)
"Supporters of hate-crimes legislation said Thursday they expect Congress to enact a law this year expanding federal penalties for acts of violence against homosexuals." (April 13, 2007, http://www.matthewshepard.org/site/PageServer?pagename=Press_Media_Matthew_Shepard_Act_Introduction_041307 / http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Hate-Crimes.html)
I fail to see the need for special legislation against so-called hate crimes. It seems to me that we already have sufficient laws in place
to dissuade people from commiting hate crimes and to punish those who do commit them.
Murder is already a felony punishable by death or life in prison. What difference does it make what the killer's motivation for the murder was? Does murder in the name of discrimination deserve a greater punishment than murder committed out of jealousy or anger or greed or monetary gain or road rage? I don't think it should. Murder is murder. Violence is violence. But that's just my opinion.
"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." (http://www.crosstalkamerica.com/shows/2007/01/hate_crimes_bill_hr254.php -- this program is available for download (MP3, etc.) if any would like to listen)
I don't really want the government acting as "thought police". Let me rephrase that: I really DO NOT want our government (especially our federal government!) to be given the role of "thought police"! (1984 anyone?) That's a job I wouldn't want to entrust to anyone other than God himself!
""It provides a federal remedy for a person who is attacked for promoting homosexual relationships, but not for a person who is attacked for encouraging people to stop engaging in homosexual behavior because it is physically and psychologically harmful," he said. "Worse yet, it provides for federal prosecution of a murderer who spews racial epithets at the victim, but not for a cold-blooded killer that is paid to commit the crime."
"There is no justification for this disparate treatment. Violent crimes should be punished regardless of the characteristics of the victim."
"The emotion of hate is an unfortunate reality of the human experience. But it is not a crime unless accompanied by a criminal action – and even then it is the action that is within the police power of the government, not the emotion." he said. "The reality is that 'hate' crime laws are designed to punish people for what they think, feel, or believe."
"" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55392)
Why should homosexuals (or any minority for that matter) receive special protection? Protection for minorities, I believe, can so easily turn into discrimination against majorities! I'm concerned that that is exactly what these sorts of laws are going to create. I thought our country was founded on the belief in "equality for all". Are some people more "equal" than others...?
""According an Associated Press report, current "hate crimes" law includes stiffer penalties for federal offenses when the attacker is motivated by the actual or perceived race, religion or ethnic background. The Conyers provision adds to that list sexual orientation, gender and disability.
...
"Criminalizing thoughts as well as actions, and creating special categories of victims, are contrary to our entire system of laws," said FRC president Tony Perkins. "Furthermore, granting special protections based on one's 'sexual orientation' has repeatedly been rejected by Congress. It is shocking that a bill designed to protect children from sexual predators is now being used to protect the sexual preference of homosexuals.
"The Senate should reject the House's attempt to advance the political agenda of homosexuals at the expense of children."
"" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46324)
If homosexuals are in need of special laws like this to protect them from discrimination, then I think Bible-believing Christians like myself are in even greater need of such protection! I don't think homosexual activists will be happy until every one of us (who follows his conscience and speaks out against homosexuality) is behind bars.
I do not hate homosexuals. By God's grace I will show them the same love and decency that I show any other person. But I cannot pretend that I think homosexuality is acceptable when the Bible tells us in no uncertain language that it is NOT.
Now I don't claim to understand homosexuality very well at all -- there are probably few things that I have more questions about -- but there are a number of people out there (many of them ex-gays themselves -- one of them, Stephen Bennett, I've heard on the radio) who make the rather politically incorrect claim that homosexuals can CHANGE, that it is NOT something genetic that they are born with but something that is influenced by environment (often by abuse by parents during childhood), that it is a sin that can be overcome, etc., and I'd like to believe they are correct, because that to me seems like the only explanation consistent with a loving God.
Some of these people/ministries include (I haven't had a chance yet to check all of them out): http://www.sbministries.org/ http://www.capalert.com/blatantmediabias.htm http://www.exodus.to/ http://www.anotherway.com/pages/anthony-more.html http://www.pathinfo.org/news.htm http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/ex-gay.html http://www.reclaimamerica.org/pages/news/news.aspx?story=66 http://www.glow.cc/res/change.htm http://www.tbm.org/homosexualschange.htm http://www.peoplecanchange.com/Resources_Links.htm http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46825
My point is, that it may soon be ILLEGAL for Christians in America to publicly share their beliefs about homosexuality, even if done peacefully and out of love (not hate) and in order to share the good news that we can become free of our sins. It doesn't matter what our TRUE MOTIVES are, because it will be perceived by some to be "hate speech".
""I've already told you about how H.R. 1592 will destroy equal justice (setting up a victim hierarchy), set up a Gay Gestapo with unlimited funds and send grandma to jail for sharing her faith on the public sidewalk, as happened in Philadelphia. But what you may not know is how this bill scheduled for a vote in the House this week will come after pastors and all those who disagree with the homosexual agenda out loud. H.R. 1592 the so-called "hate crimes" bill isn't about hate. It isn't about "crimes" (there are already stiff penalties against crimes); it's about speech.
...
Have you ever counseled from a biblical perspective or read from Roman 1? I Corinthians 6? Genesis 19? Leviticus 18 or 20? Then, if H.R. 1592 becomes law and someone who has attended your church, read your materials or heard your broadcast commits a crime – such as pushing away a cross-dresser's unwelcome advances – you are "punishable as a principal," as someone who "counsels" and "induces" the now-illegal belief that homosexual behavior is a sin.
Think this is a stretch? Think again. In 1998, I oversaw the national "Truth in Love" campaign, which expressed hope for change for those struggling in homosexuality – something for which I was accused of murder. Here's a sample of one of the full-page "Truth-in-Love" campaign ads that caused all the commotion. One ad pictured 850 ex-homosexuals with the headline, "We're standing for the truth that homosexuals can change." Brace yourself for "hateful," "bigoted" and "intolerant" speech said to be responsible for murder. (Note: If you're under 18, you may want to ask your parents before reading it.):
"We believe every human being is precious to God and is entitled to respect. But when we see great suffering among homosexuals, it's an inherent Christian calling to show compassion and concern."
Wow. With words like "precious," "respect," "compassion" and "concern," you can understand why the city of San Francisco would be prompted to accuse us of murder:
"It's not an exaggeration to say that there's a direct correlation between these acts of discrimination, like Matthew Shepard, such as when gays and lesbians are called sinful, and when major religious organizations say they can change if they try, and the horrible crimes committed against gays and lesbians." – City of San Francisco Board of Supervisors, Oct. 19, 1998.
We now have a governmental body on record connecting speech and violence. It's not even violent speech. They are saying that the hopeful message that homosexuals can change is responsible for murder. That, my friend, is why the hate-crimes legislation is the most dangerous legislation in the country. It will lead to silencing our speech just as the city of San Francisco tried to do.
H.R. 1592 isn't about hate. It isn't about crime. It's about silencing our speech. But you don't care about speaking out on "issues" such as homosexuality? As I said in my book, "The Crimnalization of Christianity," if they can silence the truth, they WILL silence the Gospel. Look no further than Philadelphia where grandmothers were thrown in jail for the "hate crime" of sharing the Gospel.
"" (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55348)
""No compassionate American is in favor of someone being verbally or physically assaulted because of his sexual preferences, but neither should we be subjected to thought crime legislation that provides special legal protections to homosexuals not accorded other Americans. Criminalizing a person's views on sexual behavior should not be a matter of federal law.
Homosexuals and their allies in Congress-notably Barney Frank in the House and Ted Kennedy in the Senate, have repeatedly claimed that our nation is experiencing an epidemic of hate crimes against homosexuals. They claim that states and local communities are incapable of dealing effectively with this wave of crime against homosexuals, so the federal government must step in to protect homosexuals from this assault. This, of course, is untrue.
Out of 11.6 million crimes committed against persons and property in 2000, only 1,517 were hate crimes directed at homosexuals [...].
Congress is currently considering several pieces of legislation that will provide federal special rights for homosexuals and punish criticism of homosexuality. These include provisions within the omnibus education bill (H.R. 1 and S. 1); ENDA, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (S. 1284); and S. 625.
If these bills pass with hate crime provisions, homosexuals will gain access to millions of tax dollars to fund pro-homosexual recruitment programs in our nation's schools.
"" http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=66
"Most people really do not have feelings of hate, although we disagree with the views and efforts by certain minorities to gain special recognitions or protections. We prefer that others live their lives they way they want so long as they don't directly impose against us and our lives. We expect that for our own views and eccentricies. Although we feel that few would actually fall within the strictly interpreted reasons for the law and that we would not be affected, that is not the case." (http://myflandersfields.blogspot.com/2007/03/hate-crime-law-introduced-against.html)
"" "When they [realize they] could go to jail for preaching the Word of God, they'll be concerned..."
"Cross-dressers rights would trump a pastor's right to preach the Bible, if the so-called Hate Crimes bill … passes."
"This is a terrible thing, to criminalize thought or emotion or even speech."
"In Canada, a Catholic city councilor was fined $1,000 for publicly stating that a gay couple's lifestyle was 'not normal and not natural.'"
"A pastor, Christian broadcaster or publisher who verbally attempts to 'intimidate' homosexuals by describing homosexuality as an abomination (Lev. 18:22) are thus high-profile targets for indictment under this legislation."
'It would appear that the only additional purpose [for enhancing punishment of bias crimes] is to provide extra punishment based on the offender's politically incorrect opinions and viewpoints,."
"There is legitimate concern that once Congress makes any 'hate' crime a federal offense, the categories of crime will expand to include speech that causes someone to 'feel' intimidated, just as they have in other places such as Australia, Canada, and Sweden."
"" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55392)
People have already been unfairly discriminated against due to "hate crime laws". Yes, there are already hate crime laws in America. The current (federal) law only includes race, color, religion or national origin, but H.R. 1592 hopes to add "actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability" to that list. Some state hate crime laws already include such groups, and some of the things that have been prosecuted lately as a result of these laws are very disturbing. (Also similar laws in other _countries_...)
I will share some of the stories I've come across that illustrate this. I hope they will disturb you as much as they do me...
""In 2004, the administration and faculty of Poway High School in San Diego, Calif., decided to set aside an entire day to celebrate "tolerance" toward homosexuality. Students were not only required to engage in positive classroom discussions about homosexuality, but were also encouraged to wear pro-homosexual T-shirts and to place duct tape over their mouths to symbolize the "silencing effect of intolerance upon gays and lesbians." One young man refused to accept such immoral indoctrination, however, and chose instead to wear a T-shirt which read: "I WILL NOT ACCEPT WHAT GOD HAS CONDEMNED" on the front and "HOMOSEXUALITY IS SHAMEFUL, Romans 1:27" on the back.
When Chase Harper was told to remove his shirt, he refused and was placed alone in a school conference room for the rest of the day. Harper's parents sued the school for violating their son's First Amendment right to free speech and eventually the case was heard by the 9th Circuit. The court arbitrarily decided that school students who profess homosexuality have a right to be free from "psychological attacks" because the students hold a rightful place in our society. It then declared that school officials need "not tolerate" anything which would destroy the "self-esteem" of our most "vulnerable teenagers." Obviously, the liberal judges on the court cared little for traditional rights of free speech or the "vulnerab[ility]" and "self-esteem" of young men and women who believe that teaching acceptance of homosexuality is "psychological[ly]" dangerous.
"" (http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55250)
"April 19, 2007 - A Canadian Christian civil marriage commissioner in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Orville Nichols, could face up to $5000 in fines for having referred a homosexual couple to a different commissioner." (http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/apr/07041905.html)
""
February 7, 2007, "When grandmas go to jail for witnessing"
Arrested for sharing the Gospel? An expected outcome in North Korea, China or any Muslim country on the globe. But in Pennsylvania? Yep. Arlene Elshinnawy, a 75-year-old grandmother of three, and Lynda Beckman, a 70-year-old grandmother of 10 (along with nine others), were arrested for sharing their faith on the public sidewalk in Philadelphia, Pa., USA. They faced 47 years (the rest of their lives) in jail for spreading the Gospel because of a Pennsylvania "hate crimes" law that is nearly identical to H.R. 254 – the "hate crimes" bill reintroduced in Congress and said to be on the "fast track" in the House Judiciary Committee. This is the same bill that previously passed both the House and Senate and was killed only because of Republican leadership opposition in conference – something we no longer have.
Don't believe hate crimes will silence your freedom of speech and freedom of religion? Think again.
...
Their fear is a rational one. Hate crimes invariably lead to fines and jail time for those who "violate" them. Just ask Sweden's Pastor Ake Green. Green faced jail time for the content of his sermon. He read from Romans Chapter 1 – something that is no longer legal in Sweden.
The "hate crimes" – or more appropriately, "thought crimes" – bill is the single most dangerous bill in America. Along with its companion, the "Employment Non-Discrimination Act," or ENDA – "Thought Crimes for your Business"– is expected to pass this session of Congress. Bow to the homosexual agenda – endorse, embrace, subsidize and celebrate it – or go out of business. That's what it did to the largest and most respected adoption agency in Boston, Catholic Charities, who, by refusing to place vulnerable orphans in homosexual homes, was forced to close its doors. England's about to get a dose of the same.
But you don't speak out about homosexuality, you say? Think you're safe? Think again. Here are just a few examples I've highlighted my book, "The Criminalization of Christianity," where you'll find a whole lot more.
Protest Islam? That's a hate crime!
Maybe it had something to do with Sept. 11. Maybe it had something to do with the beheadings. Maybe it had something to do with what is written in the Quran. But Canadian Pastor Mark Harding doesn't believe the Muslim religion is one of peace. So when his local high school started handing out copies of the Quran and announced a policy of setting aside a room for Muslim students to pray during school hours, Pastor Harding protested. Didn't think it was a good idea – especially since Christian, Jewish and Buddhist kids weren't afforded the same opportunity.
After losing an appeal to Canada's Supreme Court Oct. 17, 2002, Harding was said to have "willfully promoted hatred" in violation of Canadian law that had just passed six months earlier. He was then forced to undergo two years probation and 340 hours of "community service" at the Islamic Society of North America in Mississauga, Ontario.
So, for the "crime" of handing out leaflets protesting a high school's pro-Muslim policy, Pastor Harding was ordered to do community service to further the very religion he morally opposed.
Harding, an evangelical Protestant, says his evangelism is motivated by love for the Muslim people (rather than hate). In fact, in a phone call used as "evidence" against him in the trial, Harding verbalizes that he loves them. He says he wants them to go to heaven. Yet he received more than 3,000 hate-filled calls – many of them death threats. Some motioned by running their finger across their neck from ear to ear. Upon entering court for his trial, he required police protection from a large crowd of Muslims who were chanting, "Infidels, you will burn in hell." Of course, that speech is loving.
...
One thing's for sure, if you value your freedom, you need to use it now. Yes, you have the right to remain silent, but if you use it very much longer, those are precisely the words you, your pastor, business owner or grandmother will hear before seeing the inside of a prison cell.
"" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54125 , http://www.crosstalkamerica.com/shows/2007/04/hate_crimes_bill.php)
“‘Hate Crimes’ sends Grandma to Jail” television commercial -- Visit http://www.StopHateCrimesNow.com to hear the testimonies of those who have had first-had experience with so-called "hate crimes" laws. A 75-year-old grandmother describes how she was jailed for testifying about the Bible, in the United States.
""
"This bill just wants federal power to prosecute bias-motivated violent crimes in the states – what's wrong with that?"
"There's plenty wrong with that!" he said. First, the Constitution does not grant federal government the "police state privilege" of being your local law enforcement. "Unless the government finds evidence of slavery in the states, jury tampering, voter fraud, or crimes involving interstate commerce (where jurisdiction is unclear), the Constitution's message to the federal government is blunt and emphatic: 'Butt out of local law enforcement!'"
...
He said America's justice system requires proof of physical tangible damage before an arrest, but H.R. 254 changes that. "It seeks to establish a different 'bias motivation' justice system, which will be defined in courts by judges, as has happened in Canada."
"Judges will establish legal precedents – precedents that protect groups such as homosexuals not only from physical bias-motivated violence but also from 'verbal violence,'" Pike warned. "This will include the 'hate speech' of Bible-believing evangelical Christians.
"H.R. 254 thus does more than violate states' rights in law enforcement. It also leads inexorably to an end of free speech!"
...
"It is almost inconceivable that the same country that gave us the rule of law and limited government ... Now bows down to the homosexual revolution of organized sin masquerading as 'civil rights.'"
"Is it progress to empower a legal and cultural revolution that criminalizes the common sense idea that society should put the welfare of children first by favoring natural parenting (mom and dad) over an experimental version (dad and male lover) that models perversion to innocent children in their own home?"
... "Only strong public outcry and a Republican controlled Congress kept this type of legislation from becoming law" earlier. Now that Republican controlled Congress is gone.
"H.R. 254 would make certain types of speech a federal offense. So-called 'hate crimes' legislation is dangerous for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the blatant unconstitutionality of such laws. 'Hate crime' laws would allow federal 'thought police' to interfere in the law enforcement authority of states and localities - something our founders were clear was NOT to be allowed," she said.
"H.R. 254 would require every state to pass and enforce 'anti-hate' laws. It would outlaw stating a 'bias' against certain 'federally protected' groups such as homosexuals," she said.
... [S]uch legislation "could mean the Bible would be considered 'hate literature'' and preaching from it would be 'hate speech' because of references to religious teachings on homosexuality or other behaviors. The Orwellian implications of these types of laws mean Bible-believing Christians could become criminals simply because they spoke out about their beliefs."
... [I]n Canada and some European countries, it already is a crime to use the Internet to criticize "federally protected" groups such as homosexuals and Muslims. "In England, two men who called Islam 'wicked' were indicted … and now face seven years in prison."
... [T]he bill "sends the message that it is more hateful to kill a homosexual than a little child."
...
"This bill attempts to get into the mind of the offender and penalize him for his thoughts. Are the bill's proponents going to now lobby for a Federal Department of Thought Enforcement?"
...
"Having been charged under Pennsylvania's hate crimes law for declaring the truth about homosexuality, I can assure you that if this bill is passed and signed into law, it will be used to put Christians behind bars," said Marcavage.
"" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54260)
""[M]ainstream media has remained virtually silent, and "the vast majority of Americans remain oblivious to the existence of the hate bill in Congress, or how it dangles like the blade of a guillotine over our precious and vulnerable liberty," Pike said.
As WND has reported, such laws already have been used around the world, where in Canada pastors are fearful of reading biblical injunctions against homosexuality, and in Australia where two pastors were convicted of "vilifying" Islam.
"" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54535)
One of the people interviewed for the Laramie Project, the wife of a state trooper, I believe, mentioned there was another murder that happened around the same time as Matthew Shepard's death, but for some reason it didn't receive the same kind of national attention. Why is that? It kind of bothers me that when a heterosexual murders a homosexual, it stirs up the whole nation in an uproar, but when a (most likely) heterosexual is killed by another heterosexual in the same town, it barely even makes the local news. Am I missing something here?
How about another example?
13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising was raped 6 times and killed by a 22-year-od and a 38-year-old man in Prairie Grove, Ark.on Sept. 26, 1999. How come I've never heard of this story? How come nobody made a movie called "The Prairie Grove Project"?
""It was big news in Northwest Arkansas, but the story of Jesse Dirkhising hasn't made a ripple in the national news. I wonder why? I wonder if it's because the victim is not a part of some politically protected sub-group, a special class deserving of extra government privileges? I wonder if it is because the suspects are, indeed, members of such a group.
Remember how the nation stood riveted to the details of a hideous murder that took place in Wyoming when a homosexual was tortured to death? [...]
And then there was Jesse Dirkhising. There was no hand wringing, no candlelight marches, no national news coverage for the 13-year-old victim of homosexual rape and murder. No presidential proclamations -- even though the heinous crime took place in his home state.
"" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=14837)
""On Oct. 10, 2004, a group of 11 Christians was "preaching God's Word" to a crowd of people attending the Philadelphia "OutFest" event and displaying banners with biblical messages.
After a confrontation with a group called the Pink Angels, described by protesters as "a militant mob of homosexuals," the Christians were arrested and spent a night in jail.
Eight charges were filed: criminal conspiracy, possession of instruments of crime, reckless endangerment of another person, ethnic intimidation, riot, failure to disperse, disorderly conduct and obstructing highways.
"" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929 , http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42372)
""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.cwfa.org/articles/6522/CFI/family/index.htm)
""In Sweden in 2004, Pentecostal Pastor Ake Green was sent to prison for a month for a 2003 sermon in which he described homosexual acts as "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society."
In the Canadian province of Alberta, Rev. Stephen Boissoin is being threatened with thousands of dollars in fines by the province's Human Rights Tribunal for writing a letter to the editor decrying public school indoctrination in favor of the gay lifestyle.
If homosexuals are added to federal law in the U.S., he said, for the first time a protected class would be designated solely on the basis of sexual behavior.
"Homosexuality isn't biologically determined," he insisted. "The much-touted search for a 'gay gene' of several years back has elicited no scientific evidence."
Carlson contended that while everyone's rights should be protected, and physical attacks on individuals should always be punished, "the purpose of adding gays to hate-crimes laws is to suppress dissent and legitimize conduct which all of the world's great religions view as immoral."
Civil-rights laws for homosexuals will lead to promotion of curricula that will press children to believe all forms of sexual expression are equally valid, he said.
"" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46825)
"" "If there was ever a bill which needed to be vetoed -- this is it," said Traditional Values Coalition Executive Director Andrea Lafferty.
"Most Christians might as well rip the pages which condemn homosexuality right out of their Bibles because this bill will make it illegal to publicly express the dictates of their religious beliefs."
Lafferty and other conservatives argue that the bill will "elevate homosexuality" -- a type of behavior, they stipulate -- to the same level as race and other characteristics that can't be changed.
"The ultimate objective of this legislation is to claim that 'hate speech' -- criticism of homosexuality -- incites individuals to violence and must be suppressed and punished. This will violate the First Amendment rights of any person or group that opposes the normalization of homosexuality in our culture," TVC's Lafferty said.
"" (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200703/CUL20070321a.html)
"" I have observed the effects that such legislation has had in Europe and it is stifling and oppressive. Free speech is forever gone and people must think of the consequences of possibly being branded as racist or another label in every undertaking. It is not just speech. It is writing and any form of expression which may be against the law as interpreted by the ones responsible for enforcement. Normal conversations are stilted by the possible consequence of being reported.
I don't think many people realize the full significance of such legislation and the repressive effects it has on free expression. It gives government and ruling authorities a tool to label people and to separate them from their freedoms and property. They sound on the surface as it they are just another law with good intent, but the people who introduce and propose them know what they do and the effects that they will have. They believe the central state has precedence over individuals and society. Individuals need to be doubly on guard against this type of law.
"Ostensibly about opposing “discrimination” towards the differently sexually oriented in the provision of goods and services, the SOR’s have been decried by religious leaders and some MP’s as a means of imposing secularist homosexual ideology on believers and their institutions."
I advise all Americans, whether liberal, moderate or conservative, and whether straight or gay, to become aware of the effects that such laws have on society and how they affect people who never intended to be hateful in the things that they may be charged with, but are caught up in the net cast by an ever more encroaching and oppressive state.
...
I see how this type of legislation affects people in Europe and you are right, Lance. The left has used hate laws to silence and dominate patriots in the countries of the EU. They are used in an equivilent sense as the witch burnings in Salem. The difference being that witch trials affected a small minority while hate laws affect majority national societies.
There is too much PC present in society already. Institutionalizing it into legislation turns it into a weapon for minorities to use against the general poplace.
Brooke, the intent of hate crimes is to give coalitions of those in power in government and various minorities associating with them a big damn stick to beat citizens into submission with policies which are not otherwise favorable. They can control discussion and criticism or create thought which was not within the intent of the speaker by interpretations made by enforcers. Those enforcers always seem to be favorable to the "victims", who may not even be aware that they have been "victimized".
"" (http://myflandersfields.blogspot.com/2007/03/hate-crime-law-introduced-against.html)
I truly appreciate seeing a blog like this devoted to speaking out against minority discrimination, but I just want to encourage people to be no less tolerant of discrimination against majorities!
I would love to read what other people think about this (especially opposing viewpoints).
Thanks for your time,
Tyler Rick
Tyler,
You have contributed, greatly, to this cause with your helpful information. This topic is huge, and understanding both sides of the situation is crucial. You mentioned that we should not rely on making laws to fix our problems (solely, I assume), -maybe we should, instead, focus on educating people about these issues and how they connect with our community. I believe that this issue is critical to understand and strive to better because it is something that I believe ignorance and arrogance has a lot to do with.
If we ignore that there is a problem and don't do anything to solve it, it will continue to create barriers between citizens and destroy the barriers that we have set to protect human rights and equality. I intend to respond to all of your comments, but I hope that this will at least clarify the objective to this site-creating programs to help inform people about this issue and the extent that has affected us, universally. I hope to direct attention to Walla Walla, specifically, in my resource research. Thanks again for your information and support.
I liked your blog I asked Mary Labbs almost the same question about the feelings of black history month at Walla Walla and I came up with the same kind of feelings. It's sad, but Mary said that the rest of the 11 months is white celebration, anyways really thought it was interesting.
Post a Comment