The biggest threat to religious liberty is the addition of sexual orientation to hate crimes and employment non-discrimination laws. Clearly, those efforts are intended to take us down the road of silencing anyone who doesn’t accept the force feeding of homosexuality as not only acceptable but glorified. Regardless of vague language in the bills that allege to protect religious expression, there are already numerous cases in the United States where hate crimes laws have been used to bludgeon anyone that opposes the homosexual agenda.
Black Conservative?
October 23, 2007
18 Responses to “Black Conservative?”
Leave a Reply
Facebook
Pastors for Family Values
- Virginia Beach Church’s Saga WIth City Perfect Example Of Property Rights = Religious Liberty
- General Assembly Votes to Ensure Judicial Integrity
- Candidate Kaine’s Marriage “Pirouette”
- Incredible Irony: Pro-Abortion Obama White House Considers Unborn Babies People For Security
- Judge Not? Will General Assembly On Monday Elect Controversial Attorney To State Bench?
- Happy Mother’s Day From Team Obama!
- Media Seeks TFF’s Opinion On President Obama’s Political Coming-Out-Of-The-Closet
- 31 For 31: NC Marriage Amendment Approved In Landslide; Orwellian Name For Opponents
- Unintended Consequences
- Let’s Have A Referenda On Ten Commandments
The Family Foundation of Virginia
919 E. Main Street, Suite 1110, Richmond, Virginia 23219
T: 804.343.0010 | F: 804.343.0050 | vafamily@familyfoundation.org
©2011 The Family Foundation of Virginia
Privacy Policy
There is a good interview with Loudoun’s sheriff Simpson on our blog where he explains why hate crimes legislation is important. Read it here.
And what of efforts by the Family Foundation to silence those who would speak positively about homosexuality? What of your efforts to eliminate GSA clubs in schools? Who’s trying to silence whom?
I’ve read Family Foundation email alerts that call hate crime legislation “thought crimes,” at least where sexual orientation is concerned. What about existing hate crime legislation regarding religion, national origin, or race? Are you opposed to existing law, which involves prosecuting someone based on his thoughts while committing a crime?
And someone please explain to me what is the “homosexual lifestyle” or the “homosexual agenda.”
A very good Facts Sheet [pdf] on Hate Crimes Legislation is put out by Focus on the Family
The Facts Sheet [pdf] put out by Focus on the Family should be at this link.
This Article in Free Republic shows the real danger of this type of legislation. It’s simply an attempt to muzzle people with a Biblical understanding of these issues.
Bob, are you against existing hate crime legislation based on race, national origin or religion, since those prosecute criminals for their thoughts as well?
Prosecute crime. Is the murder of Matthew Shepard any more/less an act of hateful violence because the murderers were after drug money and didn’t even know that their victim was homosexual?
Motive is considered in sentencing now, but the punishment must always be determined by the crime.
So you support a repeal of existing hate crime legislation?
David2:
Considering myself a classical liberal, I prefer to camp under the banner that says “all men are created equal” and that their individual rights are “endowed by their Creator.” However, it has been necessary to create protections based on factors such as race in the quest for the Jeffersonian ideal. Thus I acknowledge the need for some legislation that seems preferential but is ultimately designed to eliminate such evils as slavery and eugenics.
Thus affirmative action may be preferable to the enslavement and oppression of select minorities, but better still is a world where respect for the dignity of each one leads to a world that is truely color blind. Here I think we might find agreement of a sort.
But when such legislation has the distinct effect of creating the situation in Philadelpha mentioned in the preceeding Free Republic article, it goes too far. In the years following the Civil War, reconstruction sometimes created a similar situation as the Radical Republicans enforced black suffrage while denying the votes to many whites. The modern struggles of the South are to some extent a product of this reverse discrimination.
It is worth noting that Lincoln and Johnson wanted to restore the South more quickly. Had they succeeded, race relations in the South might have been better sooner.
For what it is worth, it might serve all of us to seek a culture of respect. Base that respect firmly on the ideals of our Declaration of Independence. Rather than seeking to muzzle your opponent, as Hate Crimes legislation would undoubtably do, let us continue in constructive dialogue.
Bob K,
The truth about the 2004 Philly Pride arrests can be found here. Please review the behavior of the Repent America provocateurs. I pray you and the VFF will distance yourself from their behavior.
Victoria,
Are you willing to assure the VA GLBT community that the VFF condemns the behavior of the 2004 Philly Pride protestors?
Bob, I agree that we need to seek a culture of respect. I believe that we can, and should, be able to express our points of view in a civil way that doesn’t infringe on the right of opposing groups to do the same. Personally I believe that a crime is a crime regardless of the motivation behind it. However, I think it is intellectually and philosophically dishonest to oppose the expansion of hate crime legislation to include sexual orientation/expression, while not supporting a repeal of existing law if your primary objection is that laws against hate crimes prosecute people for their thoughts.
The article you cited in the Free Republic gives only the account of Repent America. I am familiar with the case but my understanding is different. Try this link for a different perspective: http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/inpublic.asp
I don’t think the Philadelphia 11 should have been charged with hate crimes, but it seems pretty clear that their presence was anything but peaceful. Suppose a group of gay rights activists stormed the Family Foundation’s annual gala?
These Actions and These need to be condemned as well!
How about disrupting Mass?
How about disrupting Mass? I won’t defend it. But notice how “San Francisco Mayor Art Agnos has called for prosecuting the St. Mary’s vandals under felony provisions of the state Hate Crimes Act. As Agnos said, “No person, and no cause, is made larger and more important as a result of diminishing those who differ or by acts of criminal hatred.” Very interesting.
I would still like to hear answers to this: What is the “homosexual lifestyle?” and “what is the homosexual agenda?”
You seem to think you have asked clever and tough questions.
Here are the answers.
Homosexual lifestyle – Two people of the same sex living and acting in the same manner as a man and a woman.
Homosexual agenda – Actions that will encourage society to accept homosexuality as normal. (You are winning – for now)
I and many others do not accept homosexuality because it is immoral. It is a sin. I know that a lot of people use the “dangerous lifestyle” argument to argue against homosexuality, but the truth is if the cure for AIDS was found tomorrow, homosexuality would still be a sin, just like bestiality and child molestation. This may sound harsh, but dancing around the truth does not help.
Thanks for clarifying the issue, Jay! I support your right to think of homosexuality as a sin. Keep up the good work! I’d love to hear more about the homosexual lifestyle from people who know nothing about it.