Tuesday, April 21, 2009

I urge you to oppose H.R. 1913 – the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, or any other federal “hate crimes” bill that could lay the groundwork for censorship of America’s most basic freedoms of speech, conscience and religion.

Laws already exist in all 50 states to punish violent crime, making this legislation unnecessary, unfair, indefinable, un-American and constitutionally suspect. The reality is that H.R. 1913 – the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act is not actually designed to aid in crime fighting. Wrong thoughts are undeniably the sole aim of “hate crimes” legislation and could make thinking Biblically a “hate crime.”

Go HERE to do something!

5 comments:

Jim Davis Hicks said...

I didn't make this post to open a dialogue on the Biblical grounds for whether homosexuality is right or wrong, we've already had that debate at great length in the past.

It's to protect people's RIGHT to think and say what they think is right, whether you agree or not. It's a Bill of Rights issue not a popular opinion poll regarding sexuality. If you think life is hard for those that live a homosexual lifestyle, just wait and see how hard it will be for ALL if we live in a country where you can be arrested and convicted for the crime of saying what you believe. (whether it's right or wrong, you have the right to believe it and to say it) While people are busy looking out for their special interests we are being robbed of basic human rights! If bills like this pass it might feel like a victory for the gay community but it will ultimately be a loss for all. Wake up Americans, your rights are being stripped away right in front of you.

Jim Davis Hicks said...

in response to a question: unfortunately I had to remove the entire blog entry and comments etc. as I didn't have comment moderator turned on and wasn't able to delete specific comments that starting publicly slamming and falsely accusing some specific individuals etc. and it was all anonymous so there wasn't a way to verify things etc. it was all rooted out of some bitterness issues from the past. We figured out who it was through a private invesitigator ip search deal as it became borderline kinda stalkerish and once I deleted the comments they started emailing me personally and wouldn't stop. Like AFA or not, agree with all they do or not they do help to keep you informed about many of the bills that are loaded with stuff that will only serve to destroy the bill of rights in the name of equality. Moral convictions and the right to speak them are not something we want to see taken away not matter what the benefit. Now, if those beliefs lead to physical harm etc. then the the law breaker should be convicted. In other words, I am NOT a racist but if someone thinks I'm going to go to hell because I'm white, they should have the right to say it and believe it, I can't control their beliefs nor do I want to, but if they want to help get me there more quickly by causing physical harm then they have crossed a line into law breaking and violence. My point is that freedom of speech is necessary for free thought and that should apply to liberals, conservatives, religious, atheists, ALL.

Jim Davis Hicks said...

The personal accusations etc. were not directed at me, rather someone else who wasn't even involved in the dialogue and again, with the anonymity it was impossible to verify the slander. I have no ill will toward the person, just sad they couldn't resolve it face to face and talk through their issues. I offered to connect directly to the one they were accusing.

Jim Davis Hicks said...

For anyone reading I'm not having a dialogue with myself rather someone is leaving comments that I'm reading and responding to, I just don't know how to respond to them without making it a public comment.

Jim Davis Hicks said...

Re-read my post. "could lay the groundwork."

Again laws already exist to punish crimes of violence, enforce them, but don't make new laws to protect people in a "special" way because of their race, gender, sexual orientation etc. This is why it's quite possibly "ground work", slippery slope, the basic law applied without prejudice is enough to protect life and liberty for all and should be!