22 June 2009

They will know we are Christians by our love.

I'm a stealth subscriber to Rev. James Dobson's American Family Association's email list, because frankly, there's no more convenient way to learn what The Gay Agenda is.
This morning's AFA Action Alert: Coming soon for a vote: The "Hate Crimes" bill will take away our religious freedoms.
To prove his point, Dobson links to his buddy Rev. Donald Wildmon's book that the AFA been pimping. That book carries the pithy and elegant title Speechless: Silencing the Christians: How Liberals and Homosexual Activists are Outlawing Christianity (and Judaism) to Force Their Sexual Agenda on America.
Proof the proposed legislation is a "homosecularist" attempt destroy Christianity is found in Chapter 10: The Gospel of Hate.
Advocates of hate crimes legislation like to focus on dramatic cases of violent crime. That’s not surprising. As I say, if the point of hate crimes legislation really were to prevent murder and serious assault, I might be tempted to jump on the bandwagon.
No, dumbass. The point of hate crimes legislation is really to accommodate an enhanced penalty arising from the criminal's intent — intent being a relevant aspect of criminal sentencing since as recently as the invention of crime & punishment. Sentences don't prevent crimes, they punish criminals.
Wildmon won't "jump on the bandwagon" because even though he admits there are some headline-grabbing gay bashings,
a shocking number of those headline cases are actually frauds.
This shocking number? 7.
Of those 7 false reports, 5 were filed by students, and 1 was filed in Manchester England by a reverend, leaving 1 documented US case of a grownup falsely claiming to be a gay hate-crime victim. Putting statistics aside, the fact that thousands of students have pulled fire alarms on a dare is hardly proof that fire departments as a whole are unnecessary.
Christians do not seek official victim status. Acts of persecution against Christians can be remedied under existing laws.
Well, yeah, because under existing federal hate crimes law, crimes targeting victims based on their race, national origin, or religion are already covered. The proposed law simply expands those protections to include sexual orientation, gender identity, and physical disability.
Bill O'Reilly has championed the AFA's other argument that this law is amounts to The Pedophile Protection Act because, "you could make the argument that a pedophile has a disease...disability is included. They have a mental disability."
Oh Bill, don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Pedophilia is not a disability under federal law. In fact, the Americans With Disabilities Act specifically excludes pedophilia.
Wildmon writes:
Under hate crimes statutes, Bibles, scriptural quotations, even book covers, and T-shirts that express religious beliefs have been labeled “hate speech.” This means that an inspirational poster you have in your workspace or even a bumper sticker on your car can become a crime. Not only carrying a Bible into a public place but also printing and selling Bibles can be regarded as hate crimes.
As a crusty bastard, I could "label" those MEAN PEOPLE SUCK t-shirts "hate speech," but that doesn't mean the state is going to prosecute the wearer on behalf of my hurt feelings. Apparently, they're busy with other crimes where people were actually harmed and stuff. Can you believe it?
Hate crimes laws have very little to do with hate or with crime. The primary goal of these laws is to silence Christians who object morally to sodomy...
"Very little" except hate crimes laws requires that a defendant commit a crime against a victim or property, where the target was selected for association with a protected group.
So besides being entirely about both hate and crime, I can definitely understand why some imagine that these laws are primarily intended to be mean to Christians who are just trying to love Jesus and promote his message of loving one's neighbor as oneself except when one's neighbor is gay.
Regardless, far from wanting them to be silenced about their moral objection to sodomy, I want them to expand that message and spread it from the rooftops! Hey, sodomy is sodomy, except when it's called "deviant sexual conduct," but tomayto, tomahto. If it's not inserting tab P in slot V, it's sodomy.
Their fellow Christian heterosexuals deserve to know that if they enjoy a little beej, eating at the Y, or any kind of backdoor jollies they don't deserve to be married or have custody of their children. I want them to go ahead and spread the Good News that engaging in sodomy means their existing marriages should be invalidated, they should be discharged from the military and fired from their civilian jobs. Let those lost Christian souls know that their morally offensive sexual choices mean they don't deserve any protection under law at all. It's only fair.
I'd really like to see that because, like the Westboro Baptists, these assbags get a free pass as long as they're only picking on fags. Once they start picking on Decent Americans™ it's a whole new ballgame.
Anyway, blah, blah, blah, senators.

2 chimed in:

Rebecca said...

You know the "fags" are just first, right?
Do you think we could get a serious sexual deviant conduct bill going? And like you said throw in everything that isn't straight missionary.

crustybastard said...

Hi Rebecca. Thanks for stopping by.

While amusing to contemplate, I'm afraid that's no more likely than an effort to invalidate ALL marriages under equal protection.

The point that needs to be made is that DOMA and DADT are laws created with the intent to target and encumber a specific unpopular minority with legal disabilities for no reason beyond the fact that this minority is unpopular.

SCOTUS has said in Brown, Loving, Cleborne Living Center, Romer, Lawrence, and a whole lotta other cases, that laws that function like that are inherently unconstitutional.