Twenty Five Reasons to Oppose AR Hate Crime Bill by Senator Wilkins

The words "Natural family, marriage and family values" constitutes hate speech, lawyers argue in court

 

Introduction:

 

Hate Crime Laws that are designed to sound so good, like the Equal Rights Amendment, actually criminalize thoughts and feelings.  A hate crimes bill, Arkansas SB 264 by Hank Wilkins, is listed on the Senate agenda tomorrow, Feb 21, 07, in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

Most conservatives opposing hate crime bills abhor crimes of any kind against any class of people, but the so called "hate crime" bills are really unequal protection under the law – protection for favored classes of people and favored sexual behavior.  It will punish individuals who do not conform to politically correct speech, and will prevent citizens from verbally expressing their views about what they believe to be right and wrong as evidenced by the court case summary below.

 

And as the Wall Street Journal said in their article decrying hate crime laws, "Like all restrictions on free speech, bans of "racist" or "homophobic" expression rests on a slippery slope.  Some Christian denominations believe that homosexuality is a sin.  Are their clerics to be silenced by law because this view is unacceptable…We aren't' there yet.  [but the court case below exemplifies that some areas of our country are there.] But when people can be given additional time in jail for what they were thinking while committing a crime, we are approaching rule by a thought police."

 

Court Case

 

"A special session of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is being held today [Feb 15,07] at the Stanford University Law School where lawyers are arguing whether the words 'natural family, marriage and family values' constitute 'hate speech' that could intimidate city of Oakland workers.

 

"The words were used by two city employees who wanted to launch a group of people who shared their interests and posted a notice on a city bulletin board after a series of notices from homosexual activists were delivered to them via the city's e-mail system, bulletin boards and memo distribution system.

 

"But Robert Bobb, then city manager, and Joyce Hicks, then deputy director of the Community and Economic Development Agency, ordered their notice removed, because it contained 'statements of a homophobic nature' and promoted 'sexual-orientation-based harassment.'" Link to this article. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54265

 

Following are 25 reasons to oppose Hate Crime Legislation by Dr. Robert Gagnon.  I am not saying these would be immediate results or that Wilkins or other Arkansas legislators supporting his legislation have these intentions; but like the ERA, many lawyers will tell you this is the way the court could interpret such laws and that these 25 possibilities would be part of the slippery slope that hate crime bills would initiate.

 

25 Reasons To Oppose Hate Crime Legislation by Dr. Robert Gagnon

 

1. Large fines and eventually jail time for anyone who publicly speaks out against homosexual activity or transgenderism, even as a minister, if the state determines that one's message arouses people to hate homosexual or transgendered persons. This includes messages that cite Scripture or refer to studies that show higher incidences of promiscuity and disease among homosexually active men.

 

2. Suspension without pay from one's place of employment and even outright termination if one declares in any way one's opposition to homosexual practice or transgenderism, even if, as a white-collar employee, one makes such a declaration in a "letter to an editor" outside the domain of the workplace; moreover, one will have to pay the court costs of his persecutors.

 

3. Termination from one's job if one does not support "coming out" celebrations or "gay

pride" observances in the workplace, or if one does not attend mandatory "sensitivity" or "diversity" training sessions that espouse acceptance of homosexuality.

 

4. Large fines if one owns a business and does not allow GLBT ("gay," lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered) activists to make use of the business's services to advance the GLBT agenda (e.g., if a privately owned print shop refuses to print materials for homosexual advocacy); moreover, having to pay the court costs of the government agency that prosecutes the case.

 

5. Corporations having to institute affirmative-hire programs for GLBTs as a necessary precaution against potential federal or civil lawsuits for "sexual orientation" discrimination.

 

6. Forced indoctrination of children as young as kindergarten in the public school systems into the acceptability of homosexual and transgendered behavior and the labeling of their parents' contrary religious views as "bigotry" and "hatred," through required

readings, "GLBT studies," and mandatory attendance at special diversity convocations or diversity workshops; also, mandatory "sensitivity training" for all teachers on the value of sexual orientation diversity.

 

7. Even parochial schools being required to accept "gay prom dates" and "gay clubs."

 

8. Home-schooled children not being allowed to receive certification if their parents do not teach a curriculum that incorporates appreciation for "sexual diversity."

 

9. Loss of federal funds, including hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal funds for student loans, for any Christian college or seminary that does not hire homosexually active teachers or that forbids students to engage in homosexual practice, or that allows a teacher at its institution to speak against homosexual practice.

 

10. Ultimately, the threat of loss of accreditation for Christian colleges that do not condone homosexual behavior and transgen-derism.

 

11. Students and employees required to get counseling for the alleged mental health condition of "homophobia" or risk expulsion.

 

12. Imposition of national gay marriage by the courts, through appeal to this newly formed federal civil liberties category of "sexual orientation."

 

13. Being forbidden by a judge in a separation or divorce settlement from ever speaking against homosexual practice to one's child if one's ex-partner or spouse is openly homosexual.

 

14. Having one's child (whether a foster child, adopted child, or, eventually, one's biological child) removed from one's house if the parent opposes the child's declaration of homosexual identity and activity.

 

15. Private civic organizations, as well as Christian camps and retreat centers, being fined or shut down if they do not allow their facilities to be used by persons or groups for homosexual activities (e.g., to host a "wedding" by a homosexual couple or for a meeting of a "gay choir").

 

16. Fines for any person responsible for a newspaper ad critical of homosexual practice or transgenderism, even if the advertisement merely quotes Scripture; also, fines for the newspaper that prints it.

 

17. Fines for any persons with rooms for rent in their home (e.g. a bed & breakfast) if they refuse to rent to a homosexual couple intent on having homosexual sex on the premises.

 

18. Mayors taken to court for refusing to declare Gay Pride Days in their cities and being forced to declare such celebrations.

 

19. Loss of charitable status for churches that seek to influence their members to oppose pro-homosexual legislation or that refuse to marry homosexual persons.

 

20. Fines and/or loss of license for any broadcasting corporation that criticizes, or allows its broadcasting facilities to be used for criticism of, homosexual practice over the airwaves.

 

21. Adoption and foster agencies forbidden to give any priority to heterosexual married couples over homosexual couples on the grounds that such priority would be discriminatory.

 

22. Refusing the Boy Scouts and Salvation Army the use of public facilities because of their opposition to homosexual practice and transgenderism; moreover, censuring professionals who support such organizations in their private lives (e.g., prohibiting

judges from involvement in any organization that "discriminates" on the basis of "sexual orientation").

 

23. Banning from university campuses Christian organizations that disapprove of homosexual practice (e.g., Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, Campus Crusade).

 

24. Making it illegal for members of mental health professions to counsel persons against a homosexual life.

 

25. Eventually special civil rights protection for other "sexual minorities" who can claim oppression for their "orientation": 'polysexuals' (those who are in multiple partner unions), participants in adult consensual incest, and perhaps even pedosexuals' (persons sexually oriented toward young adolescents or children).

 

 Debbie Pelley

dpelley@suddenlink.net

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hit Counter