It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

democrats vote to protect pedophiles but not military veterans in hate crimes bill

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   
Since when does "equal rights" mean "special rights"? If a person commits a crime against another, regardless of who they are, what color they are, etc...they deserve to be punished with the same rules and at the same levels as anyone else.

Why does our government insist (and why do we allow) certain groups of people to be "protected" while we (meaning everyone else) are considered unworthy of the same protection? Why am I less important than the pedophile down the road? And with that said...what crime of single-minded violence isn't about "hate"?

You are either part of humanity or you are not. You want special consideration, special rights, special laws...then do something "special" that benefits everyone, instead of that illegal, immoral or pig-headed thing you did to be considered "special" in the first place.

IMHO




posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by WeAreAWAKE
Why does our government insist (and why do we allow) certain groups of people to be "protected" while we (meaning everyone else) are considered unworthy of the same protection? Why am I less important than the pedophile down the road? And with that said...what crime of single-minded violence isn't about "hate"?


While all violence of course equates to hate, or at least rage, the difference between the laws that protect ALL of us and the special laws that protect minority groups are easily explained.

Minority groups are increasingly under attack in the USA and sadly need to be protected. We are all afforded protection under the laws of the USA but sadly there are those among us who find themselves so motivated by hate that they lash out regardless.

This bill seeks to ad an extra layer of discouragement to those who feel motivated to attack based on 'race, religion, creed, national origin, and sexual preference'.

This bill does not make 'thought crimes' a possibility and it does not make speaking out against something you disagree with illegal, in fact it is quite clear what it does see as a punishable hate crime.


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, a dangerouse weapon, 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--


You can clearly see it only outlaws the attempt to cause physical harm to someone. So all the extreme Christians can continue to speak out against gay/lesbianism, the nazis among us can continue to speak out against all races, creeds, colors and national origin they dislike, Michael Savage continue to bash who ever he wants to among these groups, so on and so forth.

BUT, if you attack someone from this group and it is obviously because they are from one of these minorities, you are gonna do MORE time than you would have prior to the passage of this bill.

To be honest, I can only imagine that at the root of everyone's grievance with this bill MUST be who it is protecting. I mean otherwise WHO CARES? If you really believe that these minorities are NOT under attack more commonly that the rest of us your not paying attention.

If you really believe this bill is bad because it does not protect our troops or because it protects pedophiles, well then you got played by the right wings desperate attempt to 'frame' this issue in a manner that would drag it down.

I am amazed that so many people want to speak out against this, as if it does ANYTHING to harm anybody int he USA...



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Animal
i don't get it, what about this is 'anti-soldier' or 'pro-pedophile'?

honestly i am getting REALLY tired of the hysteria of the right.

this bill is intended to protect minorities.

H.R. 1913 ~ Read It...



Congress makes the following findings:

(1) The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem. etc...


I would like someone to find where this bill makes a specific point to protect pedophiles, not that I do not think they do not deserve protection from harm, just that that is NOT the point of this bill.

Calling it like that is simply the right playing the 'wedge issue' card to try to motivate their shrinking 'base' to server their motives.

This is not anti-solder nor pro-pedophile, that is pure crap.

it has more to do with the rights fear of gay rights than anything else. some of the comments in the story linked in the Op are hilarious...

for example:


"I've written extensively about how this bill would criminalize Christianity and turn those who disagree with the homosexual agenda into felons, but criminalizing Christianity is just the beginning of what this bill would do. It would also 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."



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, she has committed a federal hate crime because the exhibitionism is protected under sexual orientation.



"As has proved to be true in both Europe and Canada, this Orwellian piece of legislation is the direct precursor to freedom killing and speech chilling 'hate speech' laws. It represents a thinly veiled effort to ultimately silence – under penalty of law – morally, medically and biblically based opposition to the homosexual lifestyle,"


get a grip people.

[edit on 5-5-2009 by Animal]


I'm tired of this talk of gay rights. They have the same damn rights that everyone else has. They choose their lifestyle, they need to live with the consequences of those choices. If someone chooses to beat them or kill them for it, they will pay the consequences of those actions. The same as if they chose to kill their wife for infidelity, there is no cause to increase the penalty for something for any reason. Now your getting into motivation, and that is NOT discernible. It IS getting into thought crime punishment territory with this.

You CANNOT discern motivation, even if they tell you, they could be lying and then if a faggot hits on some guy and says f%^K You faggot and the faggot hits him, then he defends himself and beats the crap out of the queer, then he goes to federal prison, that's not right......

Jaden



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Animal

Originally posted by WeAreAWAKE
Why does our government insist (and why do we allow) certain groups of people to be "protected" while we (meaning everyone else) are considered unworthy of the same protection? Why am I less important than the pedophile down the road? And with that said...what crime of single-minded violence isn't about "hate"?


While all violence of course equates to hate, or at least rage, the difference between the laws that protect ALL of us and the special laws that protect minority groups are easily explained.

Minority groups are increasingly under attack in the USA and sadly need to be protected. We are all afforded protection under the laws of the USA but sadly there are those among us who find themselves so motivated by hate that they lash out regardless.

This bill seeks to ad an extra layer of discouragement to those who feel motivated to attack based on 'race, religion, creed, national origin, and sexual preference'.

This bill does not make 'thought crimes' a possibility and it does not make speaking out against something you disagree with illegal, in fact it is quite clear what it does see as a punishable hate crime.


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, a dangerouse weapon, 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--


You can clearly see it only outlaws the attempt to cause physical harm to someone. So all the extreme Christians can continue to speak out against gay/lesbianism, the nazis among us can continue to speak out against all races, creeds, colors and national origin they dislike, Michael Savage continue to bash who ever he wants to among these groups, so on and so forth.

BUT, if you attack someone from this group and it is obviously because they are from one of these minorities, you are gonna do MORE time than you would have prior to the passage of this bill.

To be honest, I can only imagine that at the root of everyone's grievance with this bill MUST be who it is protecting. I mean otherwise WHO CARES? If you really believe that these minorities are NOT under attack more commonly that the rest of us your not paying attention.

If you really believe this bill is bad because it does not protect our troops or because it protects pedophiles, well then you got played by the right wings desperate attempt to 'frame' this issue in a manner that would drag it down.

I am amazed that so many people want to speak out against this, as if it does ANYTHING to harm anybody int he USA...



Bullcrap, it comes down to trying to determine motivation, which you CAN'T!!!!!!

If the guy says, I didn't know he was a queer. How are you going to determine that he in fact DID know????

What's going to stop someone who is straight and gets into a fight from saying that he was gay so that the other guy is automatically guilty and he is innocent.

don't try to tell me that that won't happen, because it will. You just CAN'T determine motivation. Yes, they use motive in a case, but it is suggested motive and only used to determine certain aspects, it cannot be used to determine guilt in and of itself and it can't be used for increased sentencing.

Only premeditation can be used to determine a DIFFERENT crime.

If someone pre thought out the crime to specifcally target a class of people that would be one thing and they would be guilty of consipiracy, not because of WHO they targeted, but because they planned it.

That is a different crime. Hitting someone because they are gay is not any different from hitting someone because they hit on your wife.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masterjaden

I'm tired of this talk of gay rights. They have the same damn rights that everyone else has.

They choose their lifestyle, they need to live with the consequences of those choices.


Consequences of being BORN gay? Like what you lost me?



Now your getting into motivation, and that is NOT discernible. It IS getting into thought crime punishment territory with this.


A 'thought crime' means being charged and tried for merely THINKING something. Whereas in comparison a 'hate crime' is being charged and tried for inflicting bodily harm. Big difference.



You CANNOT discern motivation, even if they tell you, they could be lying and then if a faggot hits on some guy and says f%^K You faggot and the faggot hits him, then he defends himself and beats the crap out of the queer, then he goes to federal prison, that's not right......

Jaden


I love how simple minded some people are here on ATS. Maybe it is your youth, maybe you just don't get out much, it is hard to say.

I say this of course in regards to the statement, 'you can't prove motivation'.

Really? In every case of violence you can not PROVE someones motivation?

What do we live in a vacuum? How has any court anywhere ever convicted anyone of anything if we can't prove motivation?

I am sorry to say but this argument is so simplistic it amounts to little more than pure overly rationalized idiocy.

My suggestion is that if you really want to attack this bill you do some with arguments of true substance and not intellectual drivel.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Someone once said they create a problem to give you a solution. Hmm that makes some good sense, does it not?

NWO folk uldo bout anything at this point. This law change is just a distraction to keep you focused and fighting over issues that mean nothing to those in Power. Their scrambling over their mis-steps. Paranoia setting in though this is the natural order of things.

They change a law and watch you. Change another and watch yet again. After a while one wonders why they need to watch at all? As Flail to a Crook I suppose. I thought Made-off was quite the clever name. Always wondered if it was his real name or just a _uck you very much, may we do it again message? Guess one will never know.




[edit on 6-5-2009 by Perseus Apex]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masterjaden


I'm tired of this talk of gay rights. They have the same damn rights that everyone else has. They choose their lifestyle, they need to live with the consequences of those choices. If someone chooses to beat them or kill them for it, they will pay the consequences of those actions. The same as if they chose to kill their wife for infidelity, there is no cause to increase the penalty for something for any reason. Now your getting into motivation, and that is NOT discernible. It IS getting into thought crime punishment territory with this.

You CANNOT discern motivation, even if they tell you, they could be lying and then if a faggot hits on some guy and says f%^K You faggot and the faggot hits him, then he defends himself and beats the crap out of the queer, then he goes to federal prison, that's not right......

Jaden


So I choose to be a lesbian? I wasnt born this way? Really?

We have the same rights?? Do we now? Since... when can I marry a woman I have been with for 13 years?

I am so tired of this argument. IF I could be straight I would be because it would be easier. But I can no more change that than you can change the fact that you are white/black. PLEASE stop saying it is a choice. I was born how GOD meant for me to be.

Need an example of a HATE crime I see... 15 years ago a bunch of skinheads waited for the "Queers" (your word) to leave the gay bar in town.. they beat up a dozen of us... hospitalized myself and a friend of mine.. if that wasnt hate I dont know what is. Step back take a breath and think about it please.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by ImzadiDax]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arkansas
All they have to do is put a amendment to the bill. But the dems don't think its necessary. Go figure when child rapist get more protection from the feds. Sounds like normal gov shoot first then ask questions.


Seriously... you're going to have to back that statement up with a reference, or stop the crazy talk. One or the other.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Masterjaden
 


Jaden...
At what age did you choose to like women, and if you wanted to now could you enjoy sex with another man just as much as with a woman?

That must have been a toughie since desire can be so... fickle. Right?

Acts don't make a person straight or gay. The feelings inside us do.
But something tells me that deep down you already know that don't you.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   
I don't see exactly how this protects pedophiles. Could someone walk me through it? I think that when it talks about sexual orientation in the bill, it is not talking about anything that is considered illegal.

And there is also a protection in the bill for most veterans. Many of us come out with some type of service-connected disabilty. Especially, those of us who have had the misfortune of seeing combat.

I wonder why every assault can't be considered a hate crime. If you beat someone near to death, I imagine there is some hate involved.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   
I read the whole bill. I didn't see anything in there about "pedophilia" or any other "philia". It is very broad on what is called "sexual orientation" and "sexual identity". Granted this could be interpreted to mean anything.

As far as the war veterans are concerned, There is just a little blip in the bill that states that


‘‘(3) OFFENSES OCCURRING IN THE SPECIAL MARITIME OR TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES.—Whoever, within the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States, commits an offense described in paragraph (1) or (2) shall be subject to the same penalties as pre scribed in those paragraphs.


means that this law is applicable in U.S. territories and to thos in maritime situations. (soldiers)

There are 2 dangers that I see with this bill. It gives elevated protection to some while ignoring others. This is not equality. This is reverse discrimination.

The second problem that I have with this is the rampant use of the word, "perceived". The bill is not specific enough. Is it that the perpetrator perceived that the victim was a member of this protected class or is it perceived by the victim/prosecution that this was indeed a hate crime.

If I get in a fight in a bar with a black guy, a mexican guy, or a gay guy for whatever reason, could I as a white guy be charged with a hate crime? According to my interpretation of what this bill actually states is YES.

Oh, I forgot, there is another blip in there that adds data to the hate crimes statistics act about crimes committed by and AGAINST juveniles. Perhaps juveniles will be the next "class" added to the "protected" list.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by echodogene
 


Well, I guess that's what you get when you watch a conservative, biased news broadcast.

Does this really surprise you? It shouldn't.


[edit on 6-5-2009 by tyranny22]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   
If its fox news its probably blatent propaganda trying to publicley criminalize democrates. Until they show valid proof, i wouldnt trust fox news as far as... well at all really



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAryanHope
 


Read the Bill. The OP didn't even read the Bill before she posted that "Dems vote pedophile protection". She heard it on Fox and started a thread without further investigating it.

If you read the bill, it sounds like it covers many people, not just sex offenders.

So yeah. It's just Faux News propaganda. They pulled whatever they could find out of a Bill and directed it at the majority that voted in favor of it - the Democrats.

It's Spin-Garbage news reporting.

Democrat or Republican - this crap makes me sick. But, what's worse is the people that swallow it hook, line and sinker.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by tyranny22]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Animal


honestly i am getting REALLY tired of the hysteria of the right.

it has more to do with the rights fear of gay rights than anything else. some of the comments in the story linked in the Op are hilarious...


get a grip people.

[edit on 5-5-2009 by Animal]


You should stop this kind of wide brush painting.
The left does it's fair share of hysterical shouting.


Let me paint a different picture for you, one you don't see on the Huff, or MSNBC:

1. I am a conservative
2. I am an atheist
3. I do not hate or dislike gays, blacks, jews, mexicans or anyone else for that matter.
4. When gay marrage finally passes I will be relived that this distracting issue is over.
5. I am not a rich white man.
6. My IQ is 145 (and yes, I know my writing skills still suck)
7. I am pro-gun but do not own, nor have I ever held a real gun.
8. I am anti-abortion but not anti your right to choose.
9. I do not believe every muslim is a terrorist but I do believe the majority of terrorists are muslim (currently)
10. I believe ALL networks are biased FOX just like all the rest.

Take note, there are a lot of us just like me. I am not unique.
Being a conservative isn't about believing in god or dispelling evolution or being anti-abortion, it isn't all about watching Fox news and being ignorant to the plight of the needy.

All this wide idealogical brushing of my fellow conservatives is really starting to annoy us. Be very careful how you belittle, joke and dismiss.

Grass roots and voters come out when they are angry.

The "right" you are whining about is a small vocal minority that happens to be stuck to our side soley because conservatives are mostly anti-abortion.
Please use "far-right" next time, although still an offense to me, I can at least seperate myself from your insults that way.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by echodogene
 


It does seem very odd that if something is reported by Fox News there seems to be some segment of the population who immediately will put their hands over their ears, close their eyes, and start going LA LA LA LA LA - I can't hear you - LA LA LA LA LA... It's actually very bazaar behavior from people who otherwise would claim to want as much information as possible in order to draw some conclusion to what the truth may be.

Nevertheless, here is one of the links proving that what you have stated is in fact true. I did in fact see the video of the arguments and the vote and it should be said that both the Pedophile exclusion, and the Veteran addition were voted on as amendments to the bill.

hannity.blogs.foxnews.com...

"During a House Judiciary Committee meeting on the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 (which recently passed the House), Republican Congressman Steve King offered up an amendment to exclude pedophiles from being a protected category under the legislation.

Every single Democrat voted it down."

Everything is available for anyone who chooses to look. For those who without medication are pathologically averse to anything reported by Fox, you can get the same information from the Congressional Record or a multitude of other sources.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SaraThustra
 

"For those who without medication are pathologically averse to anything reported by Fox, you can get the same information from the Congressional Record or a multitude of other sources."

No... stories claiming that Democrats in Congress will defend pedophiles before veterans is something you'll only get on Fox.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
The REAL argument against this bill is that it is unconstitutional. PERIOD It Violates the 5th Amendment. If you commit violence or bodily injury to a person its a crime regardless of their race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. The Hate Crime statutes are just another charged tacked on to the exact same crime. It ISdouble Jeopardy. You ARE being charged twice for the same crime. Hate Crime statutes are unconstitutional whether you think they are good or bad. As a personal opinion, I think they would be too open to corruption. The definition is too vague and I see it turning into "any bodily harm caused to anyone else but straight, white folk is a hate crime" way too easily. As for minorities needing special protection, what about me? I'm not a "minority" by race or sexual orientation, In fact, I'm a White, God-loving, Gun nut who affiliates himself with a 3rd party and likes to think he is a "constitutionalist" which classifies me as a potential domestic terrorist according to the Department of Homeland Security. I'm being labeled by my own damn government a possible terrorist because of my religious, and political aligning. Where's my protection under the Hate Crime statutes?



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Perseus Apex
 


"This law change is just a distraction to keep you focused and fighting over issues that mean nothing to those in Power. Their scrambling over their mis-steps. Paranoia setting in though this is the natural order of things.

They change a law and watch you. Change another and watch yet again."

I couldn't have said it better than that. That is all this is about. And from reading this thread it seems to be working like a charm. We already have hate crime laws. Whenever you hear about Chrysler not having to pay back thier billions of dollars in bailout money as part of the bankruptcy, they put something like this out to distract us from the very real and serious issues. It's all slight of hand and once again from reading this post it still works like a charm.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by WTFover
We have had "Hate Crimes" enhancements, for some time now. Can the government show it has reduced crime, at all? No. It has got to be one of the most useless wastes of time and energy.

Vandalism is a crime. Assault is a crime. Murder is a crime. If a criminal is not deterred by these, adding the phrase "Hate Crime" is not going to matter. Particularly to an angry parent of a victim of a pedophile.

Aren't all crimes against persons "Hate Crimes"?


No it does not deter crime..

What it does is galvanized these people into the minority/entitlement mind set necessary to groom and control a needed set of voters at election time.

These types of legislation are only to cultivate a specific voting block for control. What the Congress is interested in is votes....for power.

For most of these groups are of the highly emotional sort and can on cue and clue be emotionally driven/stroked to guarantee votes at election time. Particularly in high electorial vote states.

With the closeness of certain elections...state local and federal since the 2000 elections...the Democrats have sensed that they need to set the foundations for more guaranteed votes to break the possibility of close elections. IF they have to bring into the fold any kind of minority or fringe group to get votes they have clearly shown themselves willing to use this method to win elections. By This kind of strategy they intend to wrest the political power from the will of Americans and pander to every fringe or radial group as long as it keeps and maintains their political base.

They must neutralize the effectiveness of the rest of us and default the political process to these groups.

I agree with what Lost In The Darkness stated in their post


Personally I don't think any group of people should have added protection under the law . If I am beat half to death the max they will get is 15 years . But the gay guy down the street they beat him half to death the perpetrator get the same 15 years plus an additional 10 more .

By adding more years to a sentence for the beating of a protected group under the hate crimes it is saying the act against him is worse than if it happened to a regular person That is giving them a special status over and above a regular citizen . We are suppose to be equal under the law


This is in fact unequal protection of the law...verses equal protection of the law.

It will however get predictable, controllable, malleable, guaranteed votes at election time.

This is going to be exactly the same or similar tack to what the abortion issue became in years past. The political spin back then quickly became ...what was your stance on abortion. It was never ..were you qualified for the office for which one was running ..but what was ones stance on abortion. This in fact became censorship for the political offices across the land. It will be the same with this law under the guise of higher human "feelings" It will in fact become censorship ..political censorship for every office in the land.

The other name for this kind of political censorship..is Whoredom.

The buying , selling , and trading of the very souls of the people of this nation by the body politics for lucre...profit...votes.

Check to see if you can find this explanation of events even by the fabled Fox News Network. IF not, then they are part of the problem..not the solution. They too are stroking you for emotions if they do not offer this possibility or explanation.

The reason the military is not included or considered in this bill or any other is that they are voters from all kinds of states ..all walks of life. They are people under dicipline and not as easily stroked and controlled for votes. Hence not as valuable as are the emotionial train wreck type. Not as useful for keeping and maintaining power and political control.
The Military is more expendable and disposable to the body politic than are these other emotional train wreck groups.

Compare this concept to . women, gays, Blacks or other groomable, controllable, malliable, gauranteed voters who can be easily put on an emotional puppet string at election time. See the difference??
Notice all these groups mentioned can easily be put on the string by security and emotional issues/platforms for votes. The more emotional a train wreck they perceive themselves to be the more gauranteed their votes are. The "Victim Dictum" helps alot here.

Once you know and understand this methodology ..then go back and look at the actions of past Presidents and Congress...and even the Courts. Many things will become clear.

BEWARE...be aware of this tack used or misused by the body politic..all of the body politic...Republicans as well as Democrats. Also be aware of this tack when watching the shills for the various political parties. By this I mean the news media and public education.

This is nothing more than a continued political strategy being updated and evolved....or if you prefer....de evolded...... for the purposes of the body politic....lucre. This is similar to the Bread and Circuses of the Ancient Romans Empire.

Once you are able to see this through the lens of votes for power...much becomes clear about the actions of our Congress and past Presidents...even our Courts.

Thanks,
Orangetom


[edit on 6-5-2009 by orangetom1999]



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join