It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Total Emergency Alert Hate Bill Going Forward In Senate

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:03 PM
This is why we have the ACLU.

And before you smear them as a bunch of commies, they will defend your right to call your neighbor racist names and your neighbor's right as well!

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:04 PM
reply to post by TheAssociate

Wow... Great point!
If you haven't been to law school maybe you should go. A person that could actually think, could do some real damage in a court.

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:41 PM
Originally posted by Animal

The staple argument against this legislation is that it will infringe on our freedoms, when it is SO incredibly plain that, at least in this case, they will not. That is what I am calling out for the farce it is.

Right. But you're talking about the S.909 amendment, The TC has already stated the problem is with the hate crime bill and the subsequent amendments. S.909 being just ONE of those, and HR 1966 being one of the more terrifying amendments. You're saying that having the hate crime bill in itself is not inherently dangerous, we're saying it is. Because these amendments have started by examining violence (fair enough) but are in the future moving into the realm of free speech (HR 1966) The hate crime bill is a platform for all sorts of crazy ideas

The S.909 amendment isn't so dangerous I guess. I'm just baffled as to why something needs to be a hate crime when it can easily enough be classified as assault or murder. Like someone has said, if you get into a fight with someone who isn't white, you could be hit with hate crime law, and be looking at a stiffer punishment.

Still that part of the argument is just subjective, so it's really pointless. You don't think minority groups are protected well enough by law, I do. No sense running around in circles about that thing.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by Lazyninja]

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:03 PM
There are some very strong words being used here.

The introduction of this bill is likely in response to middle easterners who are having their businesses broken into, and who are now being subjected to assorted "hate crimes", such as other minorities have been in the past.

It's to protect innocent persons from those who might be frustrated or become violent with that group due to their religion or nationality, and/or whatever might be going on in the middle eastern countries.

Looks like it won't go into law anyway. The "resource" was apparently written by a skinhead, lol, or some other party, because to defend it is essentially saying you want the right to cause violence to someone, regardless of who they are or what they do, just because you disagree with religious beliefs, race, nationality, etc. Then they have the audacity to ask for money. Go figure.

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:15 PM
hoe come on, under the pre written letter to email the senate it has october 8,2004? I think this has been around for quite some time

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 08:16 PM
Reply to post by TheAssociate

NVM I misread it.

2nd line

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by ladyinwaiting

because to defend it is essentially saying you want the right to cause violence to someone, regardless of who they are or what they do, just because you disagree with religious beliefs, race, nationality, etc.

For the sake of clarity, are you implying that people who oppose hate crime legislation condone racially motivated crime?

If so (and forgive me if I misinterpreted your statement) you're wrong. The fact that I oppose double standards means I endorse equal protection under the law and oppose special protection for anyone (in this case, in the form of stiffer penalties for one group that wouldn't be imposed on another for breaking the same law) not the breaking of any law.


posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 09:26 PM
reply to post by TheAssociate

I am, in fact, saying that there are persons who need special protection under the law. It's simply an added boost to prosecution and acts as a deterent when it is PROVEN that the perpetrators had no other reason to behave violently towards the person, other than the reason of the
(Hate towards the group).

As far as individual reaction goes, I can't comment on that, nor can anyone else. I cannot comment on what or who, condones what or who. You understand if someone breaks into a business and burns it, that is punishable by law. If it discovered that the same crime was perpetrated simply because of a person's group, (as in it wasn't motivated by robbery, love of arson, or some other reason) then it becomes a hate crime, which adds another offense to the original crime.

So yes. I am in favor of limiting hate crimes as much as possible, and believe a law might act as a deterent.

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 09:34 PM
reply to post by TheAssociate

All I can do is shake my head. I just got docked 1000 points for agreeing with someone. I can't afford to point out to Lady how many laws we already have in place for hate crime. I'm going to go pull my hair now.

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 09:34 PM
reply to post by ladyinwaiting

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on that point.

Here is what the Fourteenth Amendment says:

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[emphasis mine]

I believe that hate-crime laws deter no more criminal activity than any other law, and furthermore, I believe the inherent double standard that these laws create is unconstitutional.


[edit on 14-7-2009 by TheAssociate]

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 09:46 PM
reply to post by TheAssociate

Thanks Wylee and associate. I am familiar with our laws, so explaining them to me is not really necessary.

You have my thoughts now, and I have yours.

I support that which brings the hope of peace and unity to our nation, and which discourages violence of any kind. I strongly support all our civil rights, including my own. In fact, I demand them.

Not just for myself, but for all of us, the pursuit of happiness.


posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:11 PM
Its everyone's freedom or right to hate someone or not like them. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions whether they are right or wrong. I'm not saying its ok to cause ANY kind of violence because you disagree with someone or dislike them, I'm saying its your right as a human to think disagree with others.

I swear the book 1984 or the movie V for Vendetta is slowly becoming reality!

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:39 PM
Hey nice, now this has been moved to the conspiracy forum even less people will take it seriously.

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:49 PM
There is only one answer...Anarchy would save us all.

posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 11:01 PM
This bill will never work, we overcrowded prisons, can us all be arrested for simply making a statement that may sound hateful but it isn't.

So what if I called Obama a murderer of financed capitalism, does that make me a target for hate speech?

What if I said we the people need a peaceful revolution, does that sound like hate speech?

What if I want to impeach Obama, don't I hurt his feelings and make him cry since he might be impeached he needs me detained?

This hate speech bill has many tyrannical abuses and many cops will use this against us in a court of law.

Can many of say "lets go to prison", this hate speech bill is not the answer to stop bullying. It will continue but it will be those who bribe police officers without getting caught will still be able to bully others. Remember corporations that bribe as well can bully and kill people.

This law can be abused easily, How can this law not be abused. I disagree with the hate speech laws or thought/emotion control.

Will we be arrested anytime we get angry and say something on YouTube, what about Alex Jones getting angry on his radioshow, he has already said what is deemed as hate speech and so Alex Jones would be arrested and tortured since they got him out of the spotlight.

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 02:20 PM

Originally posted by TornMind
reply to post by CuriousSkeptic

Yes, this article seems a little 'leaned' toward red neck christian republicans.... I don't know what to say; other than the over all message of stop the Hate Bill, is what is important.

Not to many people are covering it, and this bill literally will define EVERYONE'S Rights regarding speech.

IT specifically states that it cant' be used to violoate someones freedom of speech or religion.

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:02 PM
but of Coarse they were able to stop the
other bill you know the one that would
audit the FED... wonder who side these people are on....

posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 01:48 AM
The bill passed. The door is wide open now for HR 1966, which the goal the entire time.

When you have people on ATS saying...
I know what the law says but I'm only going to believe what I want to,,, This country is sunk

posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 03:07 AM
This will only divide people even more.
It will happen financially.
We are creating a caste system for the future.
The very wealthy will control areas and keep low class ignorant people out by making the prices extremely high.
Today, there are attempts to mix it up and mingle by having poor people living beside rich people in the name of diversity and opportunity.
That arrangement will be gone when this hateful bill becomes law.
The rich are the people that don't talk about, they do it, they do it with money.
The poor are the only ones that talk about it.
They complain and whine about it.
Just look at the websites that talk about this bill... they mention gays, Jews, and Mexicans.

The ''Darwin'' idea will win in the end.
A new dark age is coming.
A new segregation is coming.

posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 01:07 PM
reply to post by Kaytagg

that's the way!

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in