Hate Crimes Round #3 — House Passage!
Well, what an afternoon of debate it was on the House floor yesterday. After sitting through literally hours of debate during the House Judiciary Committee consideration of the legislation last week, I thought I had heard it all. Little did I know that I would have the good fortune to see a certain Republican representative get on the floor and actually have a fairly lengthy rant about…wait for it…wait for it…celebratory gossip blogger Perez Hilton and a certain beauty queen from the Golden State. Really? This is seriously the best you can come up with?
Anyway, after wading through such foolishness and a very witty, funny closing argument by gay Massachusetts Representative Barney Frank, the House did indeed pass the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. The final tally had a whopping 249 representatives voting “Yes”!
What’s even more impressive, the legislation advances civil rights, while upholding critical free speech and association protections. And that is something that the truest of the true civil libertarians could happily look upon. Protecting civil rights and the First Amendment need not be a zero-sum game; in fact, the two really are complements of one another.
This is a view that the ACLU shares with some friends in high places. Just yesterday, President Obama stated:
I urge members on both sides of the aisle to act on this important civil rights issue by passing this legislation to protect all of our citizens from violent acts of intolerance — legislation that will enhance civil rights protections, while also protecting our freedom of speech and association.The battle now moves over to the Senate. If they are smart, they’ll recognize that we can protect both civil rights and the free speech.
May 2nd, 2009 at 2:06am
do you immoral,ungodly people think that you are better than others? if not why should you have laws to protect you specifically?
May 3rd, 2009 at 11:57pm
American Civil liberal union.
Its sad when i see such bias in our legal system. Today i read on AOL's home page the statement (worse then white trash). What if it said (worse then black trash)? Have you ever noticed the murder rates in blue states? Their also known as welfare states. People are getting pissed off. The tea parties are just the begining. And thank you if you actually took the time to read this.
May 5th, 2009 at 10:05am
I believe if you have committed any crime you should be held accountable. However it seems to me that even if you say something about a person you are considered to have committed a hate crime. This does not make sense to me. And speaking of a certain beauty queen, I believe she spoke her mind. She was not belligerent, unrespectful. She has been treated badly by the people who want respect and equal rights? People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.
May 5th, 2009 at 9:40pm
Well well well I just found out why the far-left loons at the ACLU are for the hate crimes bill...PEDOPHILES ARE PROTECTED!!!! That's right! Those who prey on children will be able to roam about freely in neighborhoods across america without parents knowledge. This would put innocent children in danger and the ACLU is well aware of this danger. I recall an ACLU attorney in the northeast being arrested for possessing graphic child pornography. These videos showed children being violently raped by adults. So it would come as no surprise that they would want protection for pedophiles in the so-called hate crimes bill. You loons on the left had better wake up! The child you save may be your own!
May 11th, 2009 at 8:31am
Free speech - why are you arrogant devils supporting Carrie Prejean - she states her opinion and being tortured for it - where is her right to free speech, even if you animals don't agree, aren't you for free speech? hypocrites!!!!!!!!!!
May 11th, 2009 at 6:26pm
I hope that this law goes through, (and law makers ignore the blatent scare tactics of right wing, anti gay groups)!!!
Also Carrie Prejean is not being punished for stating her opinion she is being punished for:
1) She lied on her application form when she said she had never done any nude pictures (4 have recently come to light!!!)
2) Her contract says that she cannot do personal appearances (in this cause in an ad for a anti gay marriage group) that has not been approved by the Miss California USA pageant
She may loose her crown, the decision will be made tomorrow!!!
May 12th, 2009 at 12:57am
By including religion and national origin among the protected groups and by including as hate crimes:
"interferes with commercial or other economic activity in which the
victim is engaged at the time of the conduct; or
`(II) otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce",
will the legislation make criticizing and/or calling for the boycott of Israel or any of its officials a "hate crime"?
The U.S. State Dept. currently defines anti-Semitism as being critical of Israel or any of its officials.
May 12th, 2009 at 10:50pm
Steve, respectfully, you are absolutely wrong. Please check your facts before writing things that will make people think you are ignorant and ignore the good things you write.
May 13th, 2009 at 2:05pm
ACLU hypocrites,
Miss California stated an honest and lucid opinion, backed by her long-time faith. For that, she was immediately ridiculed by a belligerent and blatanly biased aggressor, who was also responsible for single-handedly causing her to lose what was an almost foregone win of the crown. Where was the ACLU then? That's right.... Still arguing for the release of interrogation photos that will hurt the USA and undoubtedly cause retaliation against those currently serving their country in an honorable manner. How many ACLU members are there in the military anyway?
And Paul, your contention that it was photos and a contract that caused her punishment noticeably ignores the immediacy of the rath to which she was subjected. Please make your arguments match the facts next time.
May 13th, 2009 at 2:12pm
It was on "Hannity" the other night Roald. I would trust Sean over ANYONE in the ACLU anyday! Your organization is also fighting for the "rights" for pedophiles to live closer to schools, which was on the Fox News website. Get your head out of the sand and see the damage your ACLU is doing to this nation.
May 13th, 2009 at 3:59pm
In response to Paul's statements above, give me a break. Carrie is being dragged over the coals because she stated her opinion. Nude photos? Your kids probably wear more revealing clothes that Carrie did in those photos. And Donald Trump did not take her crown away because of it! No lies were spoken.
Her contract may not allow for personal appearances, but she is allowed to respond to the horrid comments made about her.
I don't have anything against gay rights or even civil unions. As far as I am concerned, have all of the rights you want. But marriage has been legally defined for thousands of years as a union between a man and a woman. The DOMA also defines it that way and our President has not made any attempt to repeal it yet.
If homosexuals want to get their rights (or even pass laws enabling gay marriage), then try having respectable people (not Perez Hilton or Jane Velez-Mitchell) go on TV and present facts. If you want to know how credible Perez is, just go to his site. It is disgusting. As for Jane, she does not even give other people a chance to talk. As soon as someone tries to make a point, she screams over the top of them and tells them that they are wrong and ignorant. Oh yeah, that looks great.
I am just sick and tired of radicals screaming their heads off and if someone has a different opinion, they 1) start a press campaign against them, 2) blackmail them (yes, threatening someone with the release of photos if they don't shut up is blackmail in my book), or 3) They call in the lawyers.
May 19th, 2009 at 5:22pm
The ACLU is organized opposition. It is not worth your time to get bent out of shape over the doings of the ACLU. I feel sorry for the those that truly do appreciate and respect civil rights, human rights and sovereign rights protected by the constitution and think they find safe harbor within the ACLU. The ACLU is organized opposition established to further the cause of governmental control and the limitations of government. It is a predatory, not protection oriented, organization that is purpose built to obfuscate its members and the American people into believing that the ACLU (and it's members) are truly and valiantly fighting to protect individual rights, meanwhile it's army of staffers and lobbyists write up mock laws and paragraphs that get LITERALLY copy and pasted into bills that chip chip chip away at constitutional protections. ACLU and state, local and federal lawmakers meet and negotiate just now much constitutional infringement will 1) pass 2)be acceptable to the populace and 3) continue the incremental destruction of inalienable rights. I know most ACLU members and ACLU lawyers won't agree but their organization has sat, literally, at the table and on conference calls while bill after bill is passed and the media campaign of how to sell it is worked out...
How do you know a true blue, die hard ACLU lawyer from the traitorous sneak sell out lawyers? They quit the ACLU, period.
May 20th, 2009 at 3:03am
So this legislation will protect those such as a certian beauty queen from the GOLDEN state and a certain Republican representive from your hate and intolerance?
May 26th, 2009 at 1:31am
"I urge members on both sides of the aisle to act on this important civil rights issue by passing this legislation to protect all of our citizens from violent acts of intolerance —"
Intolerance!? Hate Crimes- Intolerance Crimes -Thought Crimes- Yeesh Why dont you all go to Gorbachevs Museum of Intolerance and Teabag yourselves and PLEASE Take Anderson Cooper with you!
Jun 22nd, 2009 at 10:59pm
Steve...Please provide some specifics.
Hannity has been exposed as a liar over and over. Please check
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_say_we_are_no_longe r.html
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp
h ttp://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jun/22/hannity-cas h-clunkers-junkyard/
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_ barack_obamas_inauguration_really_cost_4.html
In looking up these analyses, I found many more where facts made up by Hannity's guests were debunked.
LRJason...The beauty queen was not restrained in saying what she did nor were those who disagreed with her. Are conservatives and beauty queens entitled to speak without rebuttal?
Post new comment