If a homo even thinks that you or I are viewing them as anything less than normal and acceptable, they will start crying “Hate Crime!, Hate Crime! Arrest that homopbobe!”.

It is NAZI like what the FAR FRINGE LEFT is trying to RAM ROD down our throats. Homosexual activists know damn well that this is all about FORCED ACCEPTANCE! ‘666′ cannot be very far away.

My point again is this! In a FREE and OPEN society, “We have the right to HATE anything, anyone, or any group we want, it’s called freedom!”. The government cannot mandate to us that we cannot hate, or dislike something, someone, or some group or organization. Hate is a human emotion, as love is also. What they are trying to do is silence all public expression of the dislike of homosexuality, which is completely, unAmerican.

Make alcoholics a protected class, make it illegal to look down at them, after all, they are only doing what makes them feel good, so what if they had a few too many. Drunk driving should then be another necessary evil we tolerate within society, just like homosexual behavior. So what if they drive drunk and kill/hurt others, it’s just their alternative lifestyle, who are you too say it’s wrong?

Adding laws to the books that specifically protect homosexual behavior, and those who practice it is about one thing, silencing Christians, and others who find homosexual behavior unacceptable.

We must fight and pray that President Bush will veto this bill and continue to stand with us in the fight!

They are, studies show, people who are exposing the rest of us to significant health risks. They are people who are politically lobbying their ‘freedom’ over the ‘freedom’ of the majority. The majority is not a ‘class’. We are people who would counsel them to alter their behavior not only because we love them, but because we care about the greater good; our community’s health and welfare.

It is our responsibility, if we love them, to give them tough love, not blind love sanctioning irresponsible behavior. Not all behaviors result in good results, that’s where the liberal mentality is somewhat unrealistic and sick.

Would having the Hate Crime law give ‘em THREE consecutive life sentences?

Seriously.

.

“The story garnered national attention when the attack was characterized as a hate crime. But Shepard’s killers, in their first interview since their convictions, tell “20/20’s” Elizabeth Vargas that money and drugs motivated their actions that night, not hatred of gays. ”

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=277685

Again talking to prosecutors they don’t like to prosecute this cases except in cases like Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. where they can easily show the motivation for the attack. Otherwise they would rather just prosecute for plain murder/rape/assualt/battery because they have less to prove.

(8) Both at the time when the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution of the United States were adopted, and continuing to date, members of certain religious and national origin groups were and are perceived to be distinct `races’. Thus, in order to eliminate, to the extent possible, the badges, incidents, and relics of slavery, it is necessary to prohibit assaults on the basis of real or perceived religions or national origins, at least to the extent such religions or national origins were regarded as races at the time of the adoption of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

“Religions regarded as races?”

Slippery slope of re-definition here.

SEC. 4. SUPPORT FOR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS BY STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS.

(C) is motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, or is a violation of the State, local, or Tribal hate crime laws.

That bold part is not just a slippery slope, it is a precipice.

(b) Grants-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General may award grants to State, local, and Indian law enforcement agencies for extraordinary expenses associated with the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes.

Another coffer-filler for the ACLU.

(2) OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS- In implementing the grant program under this subsection, the Office of Justice Programs shall work closely with grantees to ensure that the concerns and needs of all affected parties, including community groups and schools, colleges, and universities, are addressed through the local infrastructure developed under the grants.

This one is aimed directly at PRIVATE schools, simply because it does not delineate what KIND
of schools or universities, etc. ate inluded. The wording is intentionally broad.

There is more about “Grants” than about “Hate Crimes” going on here, too.

`Sec. 249. Hate crime acts
`(a) In General-

`(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person–

“Perceived?”

Who decides who “perceived” what?

The government can tell us what we were thinking?

“Thought crime?”

`(A) IN GENERAL- 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 or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of any person–

So hand to hand violence, clubs, knives or swords are then okay and not covered by this bill?

`(3) the term `gender identity’ for the purposes of this chapter means actual or perceived gender-related characteristics.

There’s that “perceived” thing again.

`(d) Rule of Evidence- In a prosecution for an offense under this section, evidence of expression or associations of the defendant may not be introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless the evidence specifically relates to that offense. However, nothing in this section affects the rules of evidence governing impeachment of a witness.’.

The first part of this one just does not make sense.

Bills with built-in loopholes are bills introduced by the far left.

SEC. 9. SEVERABILITY.

If any provision of this Act, an amendment made by this Act, or the application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the application of the provisions of such to any person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.

This is the last section of the bill, and it is the legalese designed to circumvent SCOTUS
through chicanery.

Murder and violent assault is already a crime in all of the 50 states.

There is no Federal law against murder.

This bill is an attempt to create one.

But most importantly, this bill attempts to define what a citizen is thinking when they
are accused of a crime.

Maybe the prosecutors will enlist the aid of soothsayers.

.

Have any of you actually read the bill?