House Votes To Expand Hate Crimes Law

Bill Would Add Attacks On Gays To Federal Hate Crimes Law; White House Threatens Veto

(AP)  Just hours after the White House issued a veto threat Thursday, the House voted to add gender and sexual orientation to the categories covered by federal hate crimes law.

The House legislation, passed 237-180, also makes it easier for federal law enforcement to take part in or assist local prosecutions involving bias-motivated attacks. Similar legislation is also moving through the Senate, setting the stage for another veto showdown with President Bush.

"This is an important vote of conscience, of a statement of what America is, a society that understands that we accept differences," said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md.

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the only openly gay man in the House, presided over the chamber as the final vote was taken.

The vote came after fierce lobbying from civil rights groups, who have been pushing for years for added protections against hate crimes, and social conservatives, who say the bill threatens the right to express moral opposition to homosexuality and singles out groups of citizens for special protection.

The White House, in a statement warning of a veto, said state and local criminal laws already cover the new crimes defined under the bill, and there was "no persuasive demonstration of any need to federalize such a potentially large range of violent crime enforcement."

It also noted that the bill leaves other classes, such as the elderly, the military and police officers, without similar special status.

"Our criminal justice system has been built on the ideal of equal justice for all," said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, top Republican on the Judiciary Committee. "Under this bill justice will no longer be equal, but depend on the race, sex, sexual orientation, disability or status of the victim."

Republicans, in a parliamentary move that would have effectively killed the bill, tried to add seniors and the military to those qualifying for hate crimes protection. It was defeated on a mainly party-line vote.

Hate crimes under current federal law apply to acts of violence against individuals on the basis of race, religion, color, or national original. Federal prosecutors have jurisdiction only if the victim is engaged in a specific federally protected activity such as voting.

The House bill would extend the hate crimes category to include sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability and give federal authorities greater leeway to participate in hate crimes investigations. It approves $10 million over the next two years to help local law enforcement officials cover the cost of hate crime prosecutions.

Federal investigators could step in if local authorities are unwilling or unable to act. The Human Rights Campaign, the country's largest gay rights group, said this federal intervention could have made a difference in the case of Brandon Teena, the young Nebraska transsexual depicted in the movie "Boys Don't Cry" who was raped after two friends discovered that he was biologically female and then murdered when local police did not arrest those responsible.

But Dr. James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, warned that the true intent of the bill was "to muzzle people of faith who dare to express their moral and biblical concerns about homosexuality." If you read the Bible in a certain way, he told his broadcast listeners, "you may be guilty of committing a 'thought crime.'"

"It does not impinge on public speech or writing in any way," countered Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., pointing out that the bill explicitly reaffirms First Amendment and free speech rights.

Conyers said in a statement that state and local authorities will continue to prosecute the overwhelming majority of such cases and the bill requires the attorney general or another high-ranking Justice Department official to approve any federal prosecutions.

The legislation restates already-enacted penalties. Those using guns to commit crimes defined under the bill face prison terms of up to 10 years. Crimes involving kidnapping or sexual assault or resulting in death can bring life terms.

The Judiciary Committee cited FBI figures that there have been more than 113,000 hate crimes since 1991, including 7,163 in 1995. It said that racially motivated bias accounted for 55 percent of those incidents, religious bias for 17 percent, sexual orientation bias for 14 percent and ethnicity bias for 14 percent.

[wireferee]

Kilngon69, you asked if someone using the word F** or Qu*** can be charged with a hate crime under this law. Here is your answer. Currently, race is a protected status under the law. If I say the N-word, am I charged with a crime? No...it's not the best word to use, but it's a crime. If I were to scream the N-word as I beat the *** out of a group of Afr. Amer. then it's a hate crime, as I turned my hate into a violent act.

[gkc99]

Bushit is concerned about the Constitution?--hahahahahahahaha

[randalds]

This law does not affect free speech in any manner whatsoever and in fact goes out of it's way to specifically defend the right to free speech. To say otherwise is to either misunderstand the law, not having read the law or is lying about the law. All this law does is to extend the same hate crime protection to people based on their sexual orientation or gender and that's all. Anti-ga*y people can still spew out their religious hate, but they can't put that hate into violent action, which should not be a problem if they're real Christians after all. If they feel they need to protect some sort of "right" to beat, maim or kill people just because they don't like the fact that those people were born ga*y, then they need to re-examine their own faith because I doubt their Jesus Christ was in favor of that.

[killtheliars]

this is stupid. it is illegal to assualt someone or steal ect, so if someone commits one of these crimes against someone else they will be punished.
What some want to move toward is limiting free speech and this is not acceptable. If someone does not like *** and wants to say so, it is their right. They may not be right, but having what is thought to be an incorrect opinion is not illegal nor should it be.
If this passes all it will take is one incident where someone can link a person hearing someone speak against *** and then that someone attacking a gay person. Then we will loose the right to free speech.
Instead of doing that why don't you survey everyone. Whatever opinion is the most popular among the general population should become official policy. THerefore if thre majority says being gay is ok then *** in the military, boy scouts, clergy ect will all be fine. If the majority feels being gay is not ok then it should be made illegal. This would be more fair then limiting free speach to keep a minority happy.

[klingon69]

Listen klingon dork,

It's my body, my life, and I can choose to love and be with whomever I want so long as it hurts no one. What kind of an idiot thinks they should have the right to bother me.
Posted by ttinsly at 01:02 PM : May 04, 2007

I never denied that it was your body, or choice. But, as you said, it is your choice, however in an earlier post you stated it was not a choice, so I simply asked for clarification as to whether being homosexual was a genetic inheritance or a lifestyle choice. But, by your opening to this post is proof of the immaturity of you. Be happy in whatever you choose, but read the full thing before you decide to do any "bashing" of your own.

[randalds]

He's right. How come we NEVER see any "hate crime" prosecutions of blacks for crimes against whites? Are blacks not capable of commiting hate crimes? This whole thing is so freakin bogus!
Posted by Infidel_US at 01:28 PM : May 04, 2007

These types of crimes are actually prosecuted all of the time when the crime is one of black people assaulting white people because of their race. In fact 9 black people were convicted of hate crimes and assault against 3 white girls in Long Beach this past January for a beating that took place last Halloween. Anytime a crime is committed against someone BECAUSE of their race or sexual orientation, that is a hate crime. Of course if someone commits a property crime against someone who just happens to be a different race or sexual orientation, then that is not a hate crime. Get it?

[infidel_us]

How about the muggings of elderly people just because they are old? Wasn't there recently an occurance in NY where 2 eldery ladies were targeted by a mugger, who stated,"that I like to help the elderly.
Posted by Klingon69 at 12:18 PM : May 04, 2007

He's right. How come we NEVER see any "hate crime" prosecutions of blacks for crimes against whites? Are blacks not capable of commiting hate crimes? This whole thing is so freakin bogus!

[infidel_us]

"We don't need no thought control" - David Gilmour
That's all this PC rediculous bill is......democrats' attempt to silence dissent.

[randalds]

The only reason the "christians" are against this is because they would rather us live more fearfully and suffer more violence than have us feel more comfortable and live in peace: because they are afraid and are fanatics. And when it comes down to it they would probably prefer that we would simply die and go away anyways.
Posted by ttinsly at 01:02 PM : May 04, 2007

Sad, but true. Sometimes living here in Hollywood/West Hollywood I think I tend to forget that there is still a long way to go for ga*y rights and acceptance in most of the rest of the country. Around here no one looks twice at two men or two women walking hand in hand or sharing a quiet dinner at a restaurant. I hope that someday it's as accepted worldwide.

[klingon69]

Let's flip the tables. If I walked down the street and started beating someone just because they were Christian, people would be outraged and calling for my death. Religion is a choice, and it's protected by hate crime laws. My sexual orientation isn't a choice, and it should be protected as well!
Posted by wireferee at 05:54 PM : May 03, 2007

Ok, I ask again, being homosexual is a genentic thing, you inherit it from your parents like red hair, freckles, diabetes, heart disease...etc?
Hmmm, always was told that it was alternative lifestyle, meaning a chosen way of life.

[klingon69]

Not being an expert on the bible or a big fan of banging it over other people...but I seem to recall that it had a couple sayings...

Justice is mine said the Lord...would seem to preempt the need for man's help!

Judge not, least ye be judge...you know that old rube of people living in a class house shouldn't or is should, throw stones!
Posted by ozilot at 05:21 PM : May 03, 2007

Another says (I paraphrase)You shall not lay with a man as you would a woman for this is an abomination in the eyes of God. Not for or against ***/lesbians. Actually have a couple of cousins that are gay and 1 niece. I support their choice, just don't understand this piece of legislature. If this is signed into law, could someone saying the word "***" or "queer" now be charged with a hate crime? If them saying this does cause someone else to commit an act upon the stated gay, does that make them an accessory to the act? Too much chance of abuse herein.

[klingon69]

SHOVE IT jc, just shove it, take your biBULL fairy-tale krap and stick it.
There is no god and the biBULL is a piece of 2000 year old fiction put togetehr by morons who wanted complete control over the dumb sheeple- the KINGS who wnted riches, wealth, land, property and control put all that krap together to keep this church thing going and rake in the cash every week, penitance, fines and more.
It's all about money, power and control and the dumb sheeple like you fell for it.


Posted by newster1 at 04:54 PM : May 03, 2007

Would this qualify as hate crime speech??? It is the bashing of a select group of citizens.

[klingon69]

I think the Republicans were theowing up a smokescreen by trying to include the elderly and the military because I'm not aware of many cases where people are being attacked solely for being elderly or in the military, but I would have no problem including them. But of course, that's not what you all are talking about.
Posted by realpatriot1 at 03:49 PM : May 03, 2007

How about the muggings of elderly people just because they are old? Wasn't there recently an occurance in NY where 2 eldery ladies were targeted by a mugger, who stated,"that I like to help the elderly.

[klingon69]

The people buying into this are victims in states that don't offer protections. The Republicans are pretending as though all states have such laws. If they did those loving Christians from Kansas wouldn't be traveling the country to harass the families of vets at their funerals. Now we can put that trash in jail where they belong.

Posted by realpatriot1 at 03:49 PM : May 03, 2007

Whereas I do not defend these beliefs anymore than I will defend the beliefs of the KKK, Aryan Nation, SkinHeads...etc. If we do "put that trash in jail" are we not violating their 1st admendment rights to Free Speech?

[klingon69]

I will never believe another word from any GOPer or a social conservative christian as long as I live.

Posted by ozilot at 02:55 PM : May 03, 2007

No, not that! How will we ever be able to cope again???

[klingon69]

think you are refering to Barny Frank, D-MA.....he and his *** buddy were the ones running the g*ay brothel out of their townhouse. Probably a little "smack'm Jack'm" going on over there! :) Hope he a least got a good reach around out of the deal. LOL
Posted by Infidel_US at 02:49 PM : May 03, 2007

You are just not right...heheheheheh
rotflmao

[klingon69]

This legislation is simply an acknowlegement and a response to the fact that homosexuals are subject to violent attacks simply because they were born homosexual.


Posted by micma at 02:16 PM : May 03, 2007

So, being homosexual/gay is a genetic thing? I always heard it was an alternate lifestyle.

[klingon69]

blazercoach1-Hate crimes are punished more severely due to their nature. They don't let you boys burn crosses in people's yards like they used to, do they?
Posted by rsoxfan1123 at 01:46 PM : May 03, 2007

Not that I ever would, but like burning the flag, protesting at funerals, gay marches...etc...wouldn't burning a cross in your yard be considered Freedom of Speech/Expression???
However as I read above, no burning a cross in somebody elses yard would be illegal, but would it be protected in your own yard???

[someone231]

those that are gay or have a different gender identity, than the one they were born in, are much more likly to be a target to severe violence done to them, as its not what people think as "normal" and there is no such thing any more, What if your child who you loved so much turned out Gay or have GID, how would you feel if people treat him/her, wrong due to not being strieght, or of their born gender. The ones that oppose, are probley the ones, who have the most hate, to those who don't conform to what you think is "norm"

[randalds]

But the rhetoric that they spew out is interpreted by groups of testoserone laden young men as an excuse to go out "thumping" on a Friday or Saturday night. After all, if God don't like these folks, it must be okay to harass, beat, torture, or kill them.
Posted by kansas1946 at 11:58 PM : May 03, 2007

And they should also know that people in the ga*y community ain't gonna be as easy to thump on as once upon a time. I live in West Hollywood and there are a lot of people here, both ga*y and straight, who support ga*y rights and fight ga*y bashing. Also considering some of the body builder types here in the ga*y community those good old Christian boys just might get a real nasty surprise if they come around here looking to bash some one! Straight AND ga*y stand together in our neighborhood!