Controversy over Hate Crimes Bill

I receive action alert newsletters from both MoveOn.Org and from the American Family Association, two lobbying organizations on opposite ends of the political spectrum.  One of the things that really annoys me is that the appeal so often is to lesser human values.  Instead of providing up-front information so people can make judgments for themselves, lobbyists so often warn of the dangers of particular legislation without offering any specific evidence.  

A good example is this most recent mailing from the American Family Association about what took a lot of detective work to find was H. R. 1592: Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007.    

Here is an excerpt from the letter I received from AFA --

May 1, 2007

Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire email list of family and friends.

A message from Chuck Colson

Dear James,

Please take the time to read the enclosed article by Chuck Colson.  Click here.

This law does not define "sexual orientation," leaving open the definition of the term. To see all the behaviors covered by the term "sexual orientation," please click here.  Warning!  This listing is offensive.

When I click the link to the letter by Chuck Colson, no specifics about this proposed law are given.  The following is a representative excerpt -

Last week the House Judiciary Committee, egged on by radical homosexual groups, passed what can only be called a Thought Crimes bill. It's called the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act [this note is not part of Colson's letter and was inserted 5/13/07: without a link to the bill in question, one cannot be certain about what is being criticized here since, for example, different versions or amendments might be under consideration]. But this bill is not about hate. It's not even about crime. It's about outlawing peaceful speech-speech that asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong.

Some say we need this law to prevent attacks on homosexuals. But we already have laws against assaults on people and property. Moreover, according to the FBI, crimes against homosexuals in the United States have dropped dramatically in recent years. In 2005, out of 863,000 cases of aggravated assault, just 177 cases were crimes of bias against homosexuals-far less than even 1 percent.

Another problem is that in places where hate crimes laws have been passed, hate crimes have been defined to include verbal attacks-and even peaceful speech. The Thought Police have already prosecuted Christians under hate crimes laws in England, Sweden, Canada, and even in some places in the United States.

If this dangerous law passes, pastors who preach sermons giving the biblical view of homosexuality could be prosecuted. Christian businessmen who refuse to print pro-gay literature could be prosecuted. Groups like Exodus International, which offer therapy to those with unwanted same-sex attraction, could be shut down.

.... Clearly, the intent of this law is not to prevent crime, but to shut down freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of thought. Its passage would strike at the very heart of our democracy.

The full Congress may vote on this bill as early as this week. Unless you want Big Brother telling you what to say, what to think, and what to believe, I urge you to contact your congressman immediately, urging him or her to vote against this bill. If you visit the BreakPoint website, you'll find more information about this radical law.

When I click the link to go to the Breakpoint website to get "more information about this radical law" I just find this letter repeated and the following links -

Visit Family Research Council's Stop Thought Crimes Laws website.

Visit the websites of Exodus International and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays.

"Pro-Family Leaders Call for Equal Protection for All Americans," CitizenLink, 24 April 2007.

Peter J. Smith, "Democrats Refuse Religious Freedom Amendment to Hate Crimes Bill," LifeSite, 26 April 2007.

See this fact sheet on the hate crimes bill from Traditional Values Coalition.

Doug Huntington, "‘Day of Silence' Protestors Defended after School Suspensions," Christian Post, 26 April 2007.

Anne Morse, "Orwell Lives," The Point, 27 April 2007.

BreakPoint Commentary No. 050816, "Words Matter: Combating Orwellian Distortions."

When I check each of these links I find nothing about what the proposed law actually says except perhaps for the following -

Anne Morse, "Orwell Lives," The Point, 27 April 2007.

 ...These laws are not about violence or hatred; they're about using the power of law to silence those who disagree with you. They're about redefining civil discourse into "verbal attacks." That is, if someone "feels attacked" by words--even words on a tee shirt--then he HAS been attacked, and the "attacker" should be punished by the Ministry of Love....er, by the federal government.

fact sheet on the hate crimes bill from Traditional Values Coalition.

Last week, the Judiciary Committee voted to send H.R. 1592 to the full House for a vote on May 3, the National Day of Prayer. If it passes in the House, it will go to the Senate, where Senator Ted Kennedy is offering a nearly identical bill, which is a threat to free speech and religious expression!

Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL) added an amendment to H.R. 1592 that supposedly protects religious freedom and free speech. This isn't true. He was forced to admit during the hearing that his amendment doesn't protect a pastor's sermon if that sermon is considered "relevant" to the commission of bodily injury against a homosexual or cross-dresser. (Bodily injury includes merely touching the person.) Thus, a pastor could be convicted of a hate crime for preaching against homosexual conduct!

Without your action, this anti-Christian legislation will pass -- under the guise of hate-crime prevention -- and accomplish the following homosexual goals:

• Silence the Bible-believing Churches, Pastors and Christians
• Criminalize so-called "hate speech," - which is any speech that is critical of homosexuality or cross-dressing behaviors. The suppression of free speech will be justified by the claim that such speech "incites" individuals to commit violence against homosexuals, cross-dressers etc. Any remarks about homosexuality, such as reading Bible passages, preaching on these passages, telling a person they can come out of the homosexual lifestyle, etc. will be deemed critical remarks and will be ruled to be outside the bounds of First Amendment protections for pastors, business owners and individuals.
• Elevate homosexuality and gender confused individuals  such as drag queens, cross-dressers, she-males, etc. to the status of federally-protected minorities. These behaviors will be considered equal to race under the federal law.
• Interfere with local law enforcement by elevating every alleged incident of "hate" against a homosexual or cross-dresser into a federal crime.
• Fund anti-Christian curriculum for children K-12, through the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice to promote homosexuality and cross-dressing as normal behaviors.

In addition, HR 1592 makes false claims that:

• 1. Homosexuals are fleeing across state lines to avoid persecution;
• 2. Perpetrators are crossing state lines to commit crimes against them;
• 3. Homosexuals are so persecuted they have trouble purchasing goods and services or finding employment.

So now, at last, with the Bill # in hand I can do a Google Government search and obtain a copy of the 16 page Bill for myself.

HR 1592 is freely available for anyone to read online or to print out.

Why are these lobbying groups so intent on keeping this information from the public?  This happens repeatedly, as you can see if you have checked any of the links above.  They fail to provide links to the bills they are criticizing. It seems like they are afraid to let people make up their minds for themselves.

Although there are lots of definitions to be taken into consideration, here is what looks like the essence of the bill -

... At the request of State, local, or Tribal law enforcement agency, the Attorney General may provide technical, forensic, prosecutorial, or any other form of assistance in the criminal investigation or prosecution of any crime that-

(A) constitutes a crime of violence;

(B) constitutes a felony under the State, local, or Tribal laws; and

(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.

To me the biggest question about this bill is to what extent motivation should be the basis for prosecution.  This seems to open a Pandora's box where police and prosecutors from so many different backgrounds could cause havoc.  Ultimately it could lead to a situation where people would be afraid to express opinions for fear of being offensive or being misunderstood.  Schools have seen how certain reading materials are not considered appropriate because they promote older stereotypes and prejudices; so legal changes of this type do tend to result in major cultural shifts.

This is not to say this proposed law is necessarily bad.  But it does mean that religious people need to think of themselves as ever reforming and retranslating their beliefs into today's idioms rather than thinking that all the major issues have already been resolved in the past.  This means that Christian scholarship is more important than ever if there is to be continuity with the past and Christian identity is to be retained. 

These lobbyists want me to take action now; but I can't really hear what they are saying because they did not start with the proposed law itself and they just sound so alarmist without documentation.  They have bypassed logic and simply appealed to fear, which incites only one response in me: "God did not give us a spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind" (2 Tim 2:7). 

Although there is a place for speculation on the unintended consequences of a law such as this, I need to see how those consequences grow out of the law itself.  When you actually look at the bill, it looks like its main initial impact will be to establish sexual orientation as a protected legal minority, something that has not yet occurred, and which will have tremendous legal and judicial impact. As we noted in an earlier entry-

Maggie Gallagher says polls suggest that the majority of Americans would support an anti-discrimination law at the federal level.  Among other effects, such a law would affect tax-exempt status.  "In 1971, the IRS issued a decision redefining the tax exemption as a public endorsement or subsidy. This meant that the IRS would strip an organization of its exempt status if its purposes, although legal, were ‘contrary to public policy."

This background seems to explain the irrational response of the lobbyists noted above.  This law would also contribute to the march towards the acceptance of gay marriage.