Tuesday, May 05, 2009

HR 1913 Needs To Be Stopped

The proposal, formally called the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act after a Wyoming homosexual who was killed in a horrific robbery and beating in 1998, creates a special class for homosexuals and others with alternative sexual lifestyles and provides them protections against so-called "hate."

It specifically denies such protections to other targeted classes of citizens such as pastors, Christians, missionaries, veterans and the elderly.

H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (so-called "hate crimes" bill), which just passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 249-175, is a bill that would not only criminalize speech, but also give heightened protection to pedophiles. No kidding. And it's about to be railroaded through in the U.S. Senate (with a possible vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow!) unless it's stopped.

The bill was introduced on April 28 in the U.S. Senate as S. 909. Violating equal justice under the law, the bill adds "sexual orientation" to a list of extra-protected groups under federal law.

It would elevate pedophiles as a special protected class – since the term "sexual orientation," which has been added to the "hate crimes" legislation, includes them in the American Psychiatric Association's definition of various "sexual orientations" (30 of these APA "sexual orientations" are listed in a fact sheet provided by the Traditional Values Coalition).

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, offered this very simple amendment to H.R. 1913 in the House Judiciary Committee:

The term sexual orientation as used in this act or any amendments to this act does not include pedophilia.

It was rejected.

Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert's response in committee clarified what that means:

There are only 242 crimes where there is actually some – truly – an assault, and we just rejected an amendment to including pedophilia from being a part of this protected class.

Do you realize what that means?

If a mother hears that their child has been raped and she slaps the assailant with her purse, she is now gone after as a hate criminal because this is a protected class. There are other protected classes in here. I mean simple exhibitionism. I have female friends who have told me over the years that some guy flashed them, and their immediate reaction was to hit them with their purse. Well now, he's committed a misdemeanor, [and] she has committed a federal hate crime because the exhibitionism is protected under sexual orientation.

I know my friend said that we have a definition in the law, but there is nothing in this bill that references the definitions in the Hate Crimes Statistical Act … it's not there. We asked that it be added so we could get a specific definition. It is not there.

And having reviewed cases as an appellate judge, I know that when the legislature has the chance to include a definition and refuses, then what we look at is the plain meaning of those words. The plain meaning of sexual orientation is anything to which someone is orientated. That could include exhibitionism, it could include necrophilia (sexual arousal/activity with a corpse). … It could include urophilia (sexual arousal associated with urine), voyeurism. You see someone spying on you changing clothes and you hit them – they've committed a misdemeanor; you've committed a federal felony under this bill. It is so wrong.

Let me summarize. Pushing away an unwelcome advance of a homosexual, transgendered, cross-dresser or exhibitionist could make you a felon under this law. Speaking out against the homosexual agenda could also make you a felon if you are said to influence someone who pushes away that unwelcome advance. And pedophiles and other sexual deviant would enjoy an elevated level of protection, while children, seniors, veterans and churches would not.

My letter to Patty Murry:

The current hate crimes bill H.R. 1913 is not the answer. This bill is designed to protect those who would seek to harm my children. This bill would protect those who would seek to harm my wife. Sexual predictors would be given new freedoms and be emboldened by this bill
Currently, we can discuss and watch sexual offenders in order to keep our neighborhoods safe. After this act is put in play, monitoring sexual offenders would be a hate crime. After this act is put in play, pointing them out to other concerned neighbors would be a hate crime. Running over and removing your child from their lawn when you fear for their life, could be considered a hate crime.

We already have laws that protect all citizens equally for every known act of violence or intimidation. We don't need special rights for the sexually aggressive. We need to protect the children and those who are most vulnerable to these highly aggressive people.

Vote NO on S. 909. Stand up and tell them our children are counting on them for protection. Please use the power of your office to keep my family safe.

Safety of my family is my #1 issue. How I vote will ultimately be based on my families safety. You are up for re-election soon and this issue will be a rallying point. Choose the right side.


If I was writing a Republican or an Independent my message would have been much stronger. Since I am writing a Democrat who claims to champion family issues, I will put there claim to the challenge. Feel free to copy it and send it to yours.

Labels: , , ,

3 Comments:

Anonymous JMB said...

The strongest objection that I have to this kind of unrestrained biasness, is how this federal body politic continues to unilaterally dispose of its own constitutional place, and rightful functions.

2:02 PM, May 05, 2009  
Blogger carl said...

This particular Legislation is merely an amendment to the Washington D.C Municipal Code. Legislation for D.C is always styled as being held at the City of Washington. Always remember that Congress legislates for the City of D.C.
Pasted below is the genesis for title 18 248, H.R 1913 is an addition to Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994'.


TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 248

Amendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–322, § 330023(a)(2), amended section catchline generally. Prior to amendment, catchline read as follows: “§ 248 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances.”


One Hundred Third Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four
An Act
To amend title 18, United States Code, to assure freedom of access to reproductive
services.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994'.

5:35 PM, May 27, 2009  
Blogger ablur said...

Carl,
I don't know what you are reading but the bill I am referring to is here.
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/111/h/h1913rfs.pdf

The goal of the bill is to insert SEX and perverse SEX into everything.

Go and Read it.

12:43 PM, May 28, 2009  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home