Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How Liberals, the Green Movement, Abortion, Gay Marriage are all connected

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HATE BILL PASSES IN HOUSE!!

    Call your Senators TODAY 1-877-851-6437 toll-free or 1-202-225-3121 toll, tell them: “Please don’t vote for Sen. Kennedy’s pedophile-protecting federal ‘hate’ crimes bill, S. 909. Please insist on Judiciary hearings to debate this very dangerous, freedom-threatening legislation.”

    By Rev. Ted Pike

    Despite compelling and passionate testimony by House Republicans, the federal hate crimes bill, HR 1913, passed last week in the House of Representatives by a vote of 249 to 175.

    In what Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R, VA) called “an atrocity,” the House Rules Committee last Tuesday imposed a “closed rule” on debate and amendments, limiting debate to 120 minutes. However, contest of the rule was permitted between both sides for one hour, giving Republicans a preliminary opportunity to lay out objections to the hate bill. They failed in their attempt to lengthen the debate, and the original 120 minutes of debate ensued.

    Here are highlights of the Republican opposition:

    Rep. Virginia Foxx (R, NC) said HR 1913 will open a new category of “thought crimes” in America, moving us “down a slippery slope” to loss of freedom. She said such has happened under hate laws in Canada and Europe.

    Rep. Trent Franks (R, AZ) warned HR 1913 will end equality in America, giving special rights to federally favored groups such as ****sexuals.

    Rep. Roy Blount (R, MO) echoed Foxx’s admonition that hate laws have taken away free speech in Canada and Europe.

    Rep. Steve King (R, IA) repeated the warning of his amendment in Judiciary last week, saying pedophiles and many other deviants will obtain special rights and protection under HR 1913.
    Rep. Mary Fallin (R, OK) referenced loss of free speech in Canada and Great Britain but also how the “Philly 11″ Christians were persecuted under Pennsylvania’s hate law.

    Rep. Foxx returned, saying a federal hate law would preempt the 10th Amendment which delegates most law enforcement to the states. She said the claim that Matt Sheppard was murdered because he was a ****sexual was a “hoax;” he was killed, she said as the victim of a robbery.

    Rep. Louie Gohmert (R, TX) charged HR 1913 will divide America into groups of more favored versus less. He again cited USC Title 18, Section 2a, the foundation of HR 1913, which says anyone who through speech “induces” commission of a violent hate crime “will be tried as a principal” alongside the active offender. He said there is no “epidemic” of hate in America.

    Rep. King cited the American Psychiatric Association which lists 547 different kinds of paraphilia, or sexual deviancies. King said all of these would merit special federal protection under the class “sexual orientation” enshrined in HR 1913.

    Rep. Foxx testified, “This bill itself will spread fear and intimidation.” She was referring primarily to Christian/conservative critics of ****sexuality, Islam, illegal immigrants, etc. Such critics from the pulpit or airwaves would be increasingly silenced under the hate law’s chill on free speech.

    Rep. Hastings (D, FL), a proponent of the hate bill, brazenly agreed that HR 1913 would give a galaxy of sexual perverts special protection. He said that under hate bill protection they will not “live in fear because of who they are.”

    One particularly striking argument was made by Rep. Randy Forbes (R, VA). He said if Miss California had slapped the ****sexual judge who derided her on the stage (and across the internet) under HR 1913 she could be indicted as a “violent hate criminal,” facing a possible 10 years in prison. But, Forbes said, if the ****sexual judge had slapped her, she would have had no special protection under HR 1913. His act would have been simple assault, a misdemeanor.

    The testimony of Rep. Todd Akins (R, MO) was also unique. He said HR 1913 would actually increase hate in America. He said the American people, including young people, recognizing that they are now second-class citizens, with ****sexuals receiving special federal rights, can only resent (hate?) those who have rights and privileges above them. He also said that with the legal system already backed up, the federal hate law will create havoc within our legal system, requiring judges to also become “psychologists,” divining motives of offenders.

    Rep. Mike Pence (R, IN) said the FBI statistics show that, far from hate crimes increasing, they have steadily declined over the past 10 years. There is also no evidence that states are lax in hate law enforcement.

    Democrat testimony concluded with a special entry, followed by CSPAN camera, of Rep. Barney Frank (D, MA). He pooh-poohed the arrest of the Philly 11 Christians in 2004, saying that, although it was unjust, Republicans were irresponsible in not pointing out that the Christians were acquitted. Fortunately, Rep. Gohmert had the last word, indicating that the very fact that persons can and have been arrested for speech under state laws has a chilling effect on free speech.

    Gohmert tried to send the hate bill back to Judiciary for amendments but was overridden.

    It is now time for all who love freedom to turn their full attention to defeat of the hate bill in the Senate, where Sen. Edward Kennedy just yesterday introduced his federal hate bill, S. 909, which is certain to be moving rapidly to a vote.

    Call 1-877-851-6437 toll free or 1-202-225-3121 toll. Names of Senate Judiciary members are posted here at www.truthtellers.org.

    Tell all members of the Senate: “Please don’t vote for the pedophile-protecting federal hate crimes bill, S. 909. Please insist on Judiciary hearings to debate this very dangerous, freedom-threatening legislation.”

    [IMG][/IMG]

    Comment


    • Hate crime legislation is intended to protect groups of people from the fear created by acts of violence or intimidation inspired by hate. For example when somebody beats up a jew just because they are jewish it is in effect sending a message to the jewish community: Watch out jews, we're out to get you.

      It's similar in usage to terrorism laws, and nobody argued that they were "thought crimes". Nobody is going to be punished for, for example, thinking ****sexuality is wrong. But if they burn down a gay bar or start daubing ****phobic slurs on walls with the intention of intimidating the gay community then there are additional sentences that can be applied which deters people from engaging in campaigns of hate.

      The thing about Perez Hilton and that bimbo chick was hyperbole. But bimbo chick would be protected under the same legislation, as an attack by the loathsome Perez Hilton could be construed as motivated by religious hatred.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by squealpiggy View Post
        Hate crime legislation is intended to protect groups of people from the fear created by acts of violence or intimidation inspired by hate. For example when somebody beats up a jew just because they are jewish it is in effect sending a message to the jewish community: Watch out jews, we're out to get you.

        It's similar in usage to terrorism laws, and nobody argued that they were "thought crimes". Nobody is going to be punished for, for example, thinking ****sexuality is wrong. But if they burn down a gay bar or start daubing ****phobic slurs on walls with the intention of intimidating the gay community then there are additional sentences that can be applied which deters people from engaging in campaigns of hate.

        The thing about Perez Hilton and that bimbo chick was hyperbole. But bimbo chick would be protected under the same legislation, as an attack by the loathsome Perez Hilton could be construed as motivated by religious hatred.
        Well thanks for telling us what hate crime laws 101 is. They were passed back in the 70s.

        You really have no idea what your talking about. Their are plenty of hate crime laws already in the US. It seems right, who doesnt agree with hate crime laws? They are playing this card, year after year, on the unknowing public. But your getting into something much more complex then whats on the surface.

        Not to even mention hate crimes are VERY low in the US. The stats are out there. Its not needed in the least. But thats beside the point. These ADL legislations have passed in many countries. The results havent been good. It leads to a even more controlled media, you cant print or say the wrong "opinion". Their are scholars, writers etc. who are in prison as we speak for having the wrong "opinion" about many things, such as WWII. The main stream media doesnt report it but its happens. Thats just the least of which this bill will do.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by squealpiggy View Post
          Hate crime legislation is intended to protect groups of people from the fear created by acts of violence or intimidation inspired by hate. For example when somebody beats up a jew just because they are jewish it is in effect sending a message to the jewish community: Watch out jews, we're out to get you.

          It's similar in usage to terrorism laws, and nobody argued that they were "thought crimes". Nobody is going to be punished for, for example, thinking ****sexuality is wrong. But if they burn down a gay bar or start daubing ****phobic slurs on walls with the intention of intimidating the gay community then there are additional sentences that can be applied which deters people from engaging in campaigns of hate.

          The thing about Perez Hilton and that bimbo chick was hyperbole. But bimbo chick would be protected under the same legislation, as an attack by the loathsome Perez Hilton could be construed as motivated by religious hatred.
          sure we did

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Darkstar View Post
            Well thanks for telling us what hate crime laws 101 is. They were passed back in the 70s.

            You really have no idea what your talking about. Their are plenty of hate crime laws already in the US. It seems right, who doesnt agree with hate crime laws? They are playing this card, year after year, on the unknowing public. But your getting into something much more complex then whats on the surface.

            Not to even mention hate crimes are VERY low in the US. The stats are out there. Its not needed in the least. But thats beside the point. These ADL legislations have passed in many countries. The results havent been good. It leads to a even more controlled media, you cant print or say the wrong "opinion". Their are scholars, writers etc. who are in prison as we speak for having the wrong "opinion" about many things, such as WWII. The main stream media doesnt report it but its happens. Thats just the least of which this bill will do.

            You forgot the statist mantra:

            1. Its the thought that counts

            2. The government would never overstep its bounds.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by BmoreBrawler View Post
              Trickle up AND trickle down. Give the money to the big banks and the poor, screw the middle class.
              LMAO.....that's very.... Hitler/Nazi-esque


              Look, this whole "hate crime" nonsense is way out of proportion. Why can't everybody just be equal under the law? A crime is a crime no matter why you do it.

              Comment




              • In my opinion she doesn't even feel strongly about what she's saying, just sucking up to Barack Peron

                Comment


                • as far as her "conservatives are just like Bin Laden," the GOP did play the same card against those who were anti-war so its "fair" game. I always thought she was pretty funny.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by BmoreBrawler View Post
                    as far as her "conservatives are just like Bin Laden," the GOP did play the same card against those who were anti-war so its "fair" game. I always thought she was pretty funny.
                    I don't think what she was saying was very funny....at least in my opinion. Agressive interrogation has nothing to do with robbing a bank, she should be happy that people were there to protect American lives including herself.... which is why I don't think she really had anything to say except sucking up to the "Anointed One"

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ILLuminato View Post
                      In reality, Global Warming is a hoax and its a great thing there is a great number of people these days opening their eyes to the "inconvenient truth" (to liberals like Gore). Like most of the Left's policies, Environmentalism is not a matter of what works or what is, it is a matter of advancing the liberal agenda and controlling the citizens.

                      In a nutshell, here is the argument from liberals whether they admit it or not. Our world is overwhemingly overpopulated and we are the enemy. More humans= more carbon footprints. In order to reduce our carbon footprints, we must shrink our population. This can be accomplished through: A) Abortion (this is the most common). The less people born means less carbon footprints, this is quite obvious. B) Gay Marriage. Not only does this encourage gays to not make babies, gays reduce carbon footprint even further because they also live together, share cars and homes. This is why the gays' biggest fans are the green hippies. C) High taxes.. First of all, if taxes are high, less gas is consumed. The government also subsidizes energy for companies who fit their environmental standards.


                      With that said, the Environmentalists biggest opponents are the Conservatives and religion. Obviously, Christianity doesn't support Gay Marriage or abortion. Now whether you are Christian are not religious at all, if you're a Constitution fan, there are a few words which greatly oppose this. They are actually two word. Life and liberty. We live in a country where we pride ourselves on never leaving a soldier behind in combat no mater how dead they are, yet we never give the unborn a child a chance (this goes much deeper, like how irresponsible we've become about the act of sex, that's a different discussion).

                      On the strength of that, these are not the only ways environmentalists and especially liberals are trying to control the way you live. Al Gore recently came up with a "low carbon diet" (or so I've heard), they want to force you to drive a car they choose, and the way you live. One must question the popular opinion and create their own opinion in these uncertain times. Censorship is coming too, by the way.

                      http://frontpagemagazine.com/readArt...px?ARTID=30790
                      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear...s-predict.html
                      http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/com...ent.news.109.3
                      God is a conservative lie. I find it amazing how something with so little proof an play such a large part of American life.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP