Hillary Clinton: ‘Religious Beliefs’ Are ‘Standing in the Way’ of Gay Rights

[Forever_frost]

WASHINGTON, April 28 /Standard Newswire/ -- On Wednesday, April 29, the U.S. House is scheduled to vote on so-called "hate crimes" legislation, which would give "actual or perceived" "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" the same federal protection as race. Last week the House Judiciary Committee refused to exclude pedophiles from the bill's protection. The Committee also refused to include veterans. Moreover, the bill does not include the elderly.

H.R. 1913 (Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009) is not about stopping crime but is designed to give "actual or perceived" sexual preference or "gender identity" (which is still classified as a mental disorder) the same legal status as race. The DSM IVR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual used by psychologists and psychiatrists to diagnose mental disorders) lists more than 30 "sexual orientations" and "Gender Identity Disorders," including pedophilia. The hate crimes bill does not limit "sexual orientation" or "gender identity" and, thus, includes all these disorders and fetishes. The use of "actual or perceived" includes those with disorders or deviant sexual preferences and those who do not have such disorders or fetishes, so long as it is alleged that the person charged allegedly "thought" the other person had such disorder or fetish.

The hate crimes bill also provides that the federal government, under the direction of the Attorney General guidelines, may award grants to local law enforcement agencies to address these alleged incidents. In other words, the federal government can pay for so-called "sensitivity training" and coercive pro-homosexual propaganda.

Mathew Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, commented: "Sexual orientation and gender identity include pedophilia and every imaginable deviant fetish. Cross-dressers and pedophiles find refuge in this so-called hate crimes bill, while veterans and grandmas are left to fend for themselves. Obviously, this bill is not about the prevention of crime but is all about pushing a radical sexual anarchy. This bill will crush free speech and trample free exercise of religion."

http://www.standardnewswire.com/news/530364093.html

[Nash B.]

If I beat someone's ass that happens to be gay I get hit with a hate crime. Someone beats my ass because I served in Iraq and they disagree with the job we did there, it's fine. Explain to me how they aren't given special protections.

Doesn't sound like much of a protection. You both got your asses kicked.

[Forever_frost]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvFsVgiy9EA

Wasserman Schultz: Veterans are not "Real Victims"

[Forever_frost]

Doesn't sound like much of a protection. You both got your asses kicked.

Except I get prosecuted for a hate crime, he gets busted for simple assault. Tell me, where is the equal protection under the law there?

[Forever_frost]

Come on Nash, tell me how them being protected by hate crime laws and heterosexuals and veterans and whites aren't. Tell me how that is equal protection and blind justice. I'll wait.

[Nash B.]

Except I get prosecuted for a hate crime, he gets busted for simple assault. Tell me, where is the equal protection under the law there?

Hate crimes exist for other minorities, too, don't they? Where's that in the Constitution?

[Forever_frost]

Hate crimes exist for other minorities, too, don't they? Where's that in the Constitution?

Now you're getting the idea. It's not. There is 'equal protection under the law' not special protections for special classes. So if it's not there, if the power isn't in there, then the federal government has no power to do so. You just made my point.


And you just admitted that it's not the same rights as everyone else. It's different rights protected by a different standard. So you are for special rights based on attributes

[Treasure Chest]

That's where you're delusional. It's not behind closed doors anymore. It's on TV, it's in legislation, it's in the military, its in our schools. It used to be a sexual preference, now it's an entire movement with the sole agenda of destroying the religous and moral foundation that this country was built on. They won't stop until we're a society of deviants, and we will end up just like those two cities in the book of Genesis.

I think the two cities you're looking for are Sodom and Gommorrah......speaking of sodomy....did you know that, on the books, oral and anal sex are still illegal in quite a few states? It's "deviant behavior," even if it's heterosexual, in some of those states.

[Baba Ganoush]

I think the two cities you're looking for are Sodom and Gommorrah......speaking of sodomy....did you know that, on the books, oral and anal sex are still illegal in quite a few states? It's "deviant behavior," even if it's heterosexual, in some of those states.

Yes, that is what I was referring to. I was aware of the names, I just wanted to invoke a little thought, and not sound like I was at a pulpit.

Those laws are referring exclusively to public or statutory sexual acts, not all sexual acts.

[Treasure Chest]

Yes, that is what I was referring to. I was aware of the names, I just wanted to invoke a little thought, and not sound like I was at a pulpit.

Those laws are referring exclusively to public or statutory sexual acts, not all sexual acts.

Negative Ghostrider.....some don't discriminate and even call into question consensual acts of married couples, in the privacy of their own homes.

[Baba Ganoush]

Negative Ghostrider.....some don't discriminate and even call into question consensual acts of married couples, in the privacy of their own homes.

The Sodomy laws you are talking about are 300 years old, and as of 2003, according to or Supreme Court, completely invalid in all of The United States.

So what's your point?

[racrguy]

There's soooo much DERP in all these posts it's going to take me a while to wade through all the bullshit.

Tell me, which is expressly mentioned in the Constitution. freedom of religion or separate rights for homosexuals?

And holy shit, someone else who's read Alynsky

You're free to your religion. However, you aren't free to use your religion to deny the same rights and privileges to others based on your religion

Homosexuals have the same rights as anyone else but they are not entitled to any extra or special rights.

The trap homosexuals and many others have gotten themselves into is mistaking behavior for sexuality.

Your sexuality you are born into; male or female. The sex act itself is behavior.

Except they don't.

Remember how it was said "You just allow us to be openly gay in the military, that's all we want." Now they want benefits for their partners though the federal government doesn't recognize gay marriages. Which means that they want the federal government to push for a federal law recognizing gay marriages and benefits for gay partners.

At what point do we stop giving these people special protections?

So what you're arguing against is homosexual couples getting the same exact treatment you get? I assume your wife gets some type of benefits because of your disability. But on the off chance she doesn't. If you were married while in the military, would your spouse not get benefits? I know when my father was in the Navy, all of my siblings and my mother had health care coverage.

Hey now guys, we're in an emerging "culture of tolerance". Even though a certain individuals' actions may be considered wrong or controversial, you have no right to deny their acceptance. To speak out for your religious beliefs and morals is what is wrong! Just shut up and accept your cool-aid, cause if you don't, you're a bully and you will be hunted down and scratched/slapped to death!!!!


Seriously though, we lost this battle when we gave even a millisecond of consideration that homosexuality is somehow in our genetic makup, and not a choice. I agree with svo855, it is a behavior, an unacceptable behavior that has now been accepted as normal. This will only lead to the destruction of the moral fabric of our nation. That is not a stretch, it is a fact.

You can speak out for your beliefs, but expect to be mocked into oblivion by people like me when you don't have a valid justification for your attempts at removing the rights of others.

Not concerned at all. They're the one putting it in my face, not the other way around. You don't see straight parades do you? You don't see big signs that say "I'm straight, deal with it!" do you? So if I'm not supposed to be worried about what they do, why are they a protected class and any actions against someone who happens to be gay a hate crime?

Well, I'd imagine if you started treating them equally they'd probably leave you along. And on the parades thing "LET'S REMOVE THANKSGIVING, THEY HAVE PARADES THEY'RE SHOVING IN MY FACE!" Is effectively what you're saying.

That's where you're delusional. It's not behind closed doors anymore. It's on TV, it's in legislation, it's in the military, its in our schools. It used to be a sexual preference, now it's an entire movement with the sole agenda of destroying the religous and moral foundation that this country was built on. They won't stop until we're a society of deviants, and we will end up just like those two cities in the book of Genesis.

Destroying the religious foundation? I hate to break it to you guy, but the foundation of this nation specifically excluded religion because the founding fathers saw what it did in Britain and other places. And another thing, it can be argued that homosexuality in nature has been around far longer than your religion.

Every group is hated by someone else Nash. When was the last time you heard about a love crime? Everything is a hate crime. Not closed minded at all. What about my rights and religious beliefs, which I have a 1st amendment right to? Where are special rights and protections for gays mentioned in the Constitution Nash?

Again, you have your rights to religious beliefs, you do not have the right to deny others theirs. Where are the special rights and protections in the constitution regarding believers that allow them to take away rights and privileges of other groups?

They're called "hate crimes" for starters. The ACLU does not have a division for heterosexuals' protection.


My nephew in grade school talks about a gay boy in his school that harasses him. I tell him to settle it by the flag pole. If he does, he's the bully, and the other kid is just "being cute". The fuck is that? Yup, special treatment.

I'm sure that if you were attacked by someone solely because you're heterosexual the other party would get charged with a hate crime as well, yet we don't see that, do we? All we see are close-minded fucks like you that beat other people because they don't subscribe to the same thought patterns you do.

Except I get prosecuted for a hate crime, he gets busted for simple assault. Tell me, where is the equal protection under the law there?

News flash, there are certain protected classes that there are laws about. Guess what, religion is one of them. If a homosexual were to attack you because of your religion, they'd get a hate crime. If you attack someone because of their sexuality, hate crime. Military service is not a protected class. Why do we have protected classes? Because ignorant people can't seem to keep things on a half intelligent level and resort to violence.

The Sodomy laws you are talking about are 300 years old, and as of 2003, according to or Supreme Court, completely invalid in all of The United States.

So what's your point?

The point I imagine she's trying to make is that people have been trying to control what other people do in the bedroom for a long time. Doesn't make it right though

Also, post the SC decision that overturns them. It's funny that they were on the books for so long. Also, how can laws be 300 years old, when the country is only 235 years old. You might want to be a bit more accurate when making statements.

[racrguy]

What it all boils down to, is the gay rights movement of today is the same as the black rights movement of ~30 years ago. A bunch of ignorant people trying to deny simple things from an entire group of another people...

[Forever_frost]

Tell me where hate crimes are listed as enumerated powers in the constitution and how it doesn't fall foul of the equal protection clause.

I'll wait.

[racrguy]

Tell me where hate crimes are listed as enumerated powers in the constitution and how it doesn't fall foul of the equal protection clause.

I'll wait.

If you don't like it, take it up with the supreme court. That's what they're there for. Or are you going to argue that case law doesn't apply again, then turn around and try to use case law to support an argument of yours.

Judicial powers
S1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
S2
(The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.) (This section in parentheses is modified by the 11th Amendment.)

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.