Michael Wolfe

In one of the worst and grossest violation of the legislative process, an entire bill, the`Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act’ was inserted into and passed along with the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 . Slipped in as an amendment, the whole process made an utter mockery of our system, and against stressed the need for a law mandating single issue legislation. Why did they do this? They know the American people value free speech, they know ethnic minorities are already protected under current laws, they know that an open debate on Hate Crimes would be a lost cause, much like the open debate that has been raging about ObamaCare which has seriously slowed down (but not yet killed) Obama-Pelosi’s unilateral push for it.

This hell-inspired bill now makes some people more valuable in the eyes of the law, and thus, crimes committed against them receive harsher sentences.

• (1) The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem.

Such a bill requires the thought process of the defendant to be taken into consideration, think “the department of pre-crime”.  Not only that, but it adds changeable behaviors to the list of federally protected attributes which once only included immutables like race, color, national origin and disability. Behaviors which many Americans consider perverse are now enshrined essentially as protected minorities in federal law. Moreover, so called “gender identity” can change daily.

Lets look at this tragic legislation. Congress, the wise and all-knowing group that they are:

Congress makes the following findings:

• (1) The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem.

Is not ALL violent crime a “serious national problem?” “Hate crimes dealing with race, color, national origin and sex are already codified law, the sole purpose of this bill, despite the insertion of James Byrd, Jr’s name, was to advance the leftist’s sexual agenda.

• (2) Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive.

Again, as is ALL violent crime.

• (3) State and local authorities are now and will continue to be responsible for prosecuting the overwhelming majority of violent crimes in the United States, including violent crimes motivated by bias. These authorities can carry out their responsibilities more effectively with greater Federal assistance.

The federal government here seeks to integrate itself even deeper into the affairs of states, but I digress.

• (4) Existing Federal law is inadequate to address this problem.

This is a lie. Federal law already provides for the punishment of violent crime. Just because they say it, and write it into a law, does not mean it is the truth.

• (5) A prominent characteristic of a violent crime motivated by bias is that it devastates not just the actual victim and the family and friends of the victim, but frequently savages the community sharing the traits that caused the victim to be selected.

So now, we have an individual crime, that has been transformed into a crime against a huge group of people, who were neither party to, nor victims of the crime.

• (6) Such violence substantially affects interstate commerce in many ways, including the following:

Oh really, this is interesting. So is sexually based regulation of interstate commerce on the way too? If some victims are worth more than others, are some shoppers and business worth more than others? This dangerous line of thinking will go along way in destroying equality in the United States.

• • (A) The movement of members of targeted groups is impeded, and members of such groups are forced to move across State lines to escape the incidence or risk of such violence.

This is absurd. The actions of one apprehended and convicted murderer would impede the movements of an entire group of people across the entire nation? Really?

• • (B) Members of targeted groups are prevented from purchasing goods and services, obtaining or sustaining employment, or participating in other commercial activity.

This can only be seen to impact religious or christian business owners, who do not want to be associated with homosexual, transexual or people uncertain of their gender expression, following the biblical injunction to “not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers or unrighteousness.” Racial discrimination is already illegal nationwide.

• • (C) Perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence.
  • (D) Channels, facilities, and instrumentalities of interstate commerce are used to facilitate the commission of such violence.
  • (E) Such violence is committed using articles that have traveled in interstate commerce.

Again, I fail to see what this has to do with interstate commerce, and can only see it leading to sexuality playing a role in some future commerce bill.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
(Isaiah 5:20-21)

What Hate Crimes Legislation means:

Now that we in the United States have a federal law granting “sexual minorities” and religion protected status, here are some of the things we have to look forward to:

English Christian hotel owners sued for marriage policy

New Mexico Christian photographer sued for refusing to photo gay “wedding.”

California Christian school sued for “sexual orientation” policy

Religious Hate Crimes law condemns Christian for speaking against Islam

Canadian Pastor’s letter to the editor with a moral case against homosexuality hate speech

Quote: “Attorney General Eric Holder admitted a homosexual activist who is attacked following a Christian minister’s sermon about homosexuality would be protected by the proposed federal law, but a minister attacked by a homosexual wouldn’t be.

“But won’t Christians benefit from religious hate crimes protection. Given the current administration, no. Second, any group claiming to have the word of God, and to know the will of God should be able to defend the word of God with holy wisdom. The bible has been around for almost 2000 years, and has stood the test of time. Regimes have banned it, churches in the dark ages burned it and those who printed it, “science” critics have ripped into it, and still it stands. God does not need draconian laws to defend his name. Those religions who fear criticism, and seek to pass laws that ban such criticism, as the Islamic “republics” have, must be afraid that their god won’t stand up to criticism.

Now that we have our own national hate crimes law, I *hope* this next article happens here:

Canada’s internet hate crimes law ruled unconstitutional, and they don’t have a “1st amendment!”

Disclaimer: Opposition to a lifestyle, action or political/social cause (LAoPSC) does not mean hatred of those who engage in aforementioned disapproved LAoPSC. Believing that 2 wrongs do not make a right; I hereby denounce, discourage and reject any and all violence perpetuated, committed or plotted by any individual, group, organization or entity against those who support LAoPSC.