Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[Senator] Gordon Smith Creates Hate Crime
Oregon Magazine ^ | August 13, 2003 | Larry Leonard

Posted on 08/13/2003 2:16:56 PM PDT by WaterDragon

Oregon's marvelous federal senator, Mr. Smith, is working with Ted "Chappy" Kennedy of the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of Massachusetts to enlarge the scope of "hate crime laws."

It is traditional in law that the reason a killing happens has a bearing on the punishment, if any, associated with the event.

The basic difference is intent, though if the intent is part of a situation involving a typical self defense, the killing is usually legal. Where the death is not a matter of self defense, long-established rules hold sway.

If you kill somebody without intending to do so, and not as a result of your negligent carelessness, that is one thing.

If the event comes about as a result of your negligent carelessness, even though you did not intend to kill anbody, that is another thing.

If you do it while engaged in felonious activity, like a robbery, that is a third thing.

And, if the killing is the result of intent on your part, that is a fourth thing which is called murder.

But hate crime laws add a fifth thing: affirmative action punishment....(snip)


(Excerpt) Read more at oregonmag.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Extended News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Oregon
KEYWORDS: anticonstitution; gordonsmith; hatecrime; oregon; senators; smithkennedy; thoughtpolice

1 posted on 08/13/2003 2:16:57 PM PDT by WaterDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WaterDragon; mhking
(mhking ping)

Has anyone got data on where this legislation is, ie. committee, debate, etc.?

2 posted on 08/13/2003 2:23:06 PM PDT by Old Sarge (Serving You... on Operation Noble Eagle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge
"Has anyone got data on where this legislation is, ie. committee, debate, etc.? "


DOA
3 posted on 08/13/2003 3:06:20 PM PDT by Erik Latranyi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; Khepera; elwoodp; MAKnight; condolinda; mafree; Trueblackman; FRlurker; Teacher317; ...
I know that a question like this is verbotten by the PC police, but isn't any form of pre-meditated murder a hate crime?

Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)

Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.

4 posted on 08/13/2003 3:16:09 PM PDT by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge
Has anyone got data on where this legislation is, ie. committee, debate, etc.?

Got no wind on this one - I'll dig a bit but I'm not hopeful...

5 posted on 08/13/2003 3:16:44 PM PDT by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mhking
Exactly, as a kid when someone beat the crap out of me, the fact they hated my guts was a given. I guess since Manson and his freaks killed white people like themselves, hate wasn't a factor in sticking forks in people.
6 posted on 08/13/2003 3:50:49 PM PDT by cincysux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WaterDragon
These gongressional morons are only doing their duty--for the progressive movements to which they belong. They exist only to grow government by any means neccessary, including making idiotic laws that mean nothing, and do no real good.
7 posted on 08/13/2003 3:55:54 PM PDT by vpintheak (Our Liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cincysux
I guess the feeling is that the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment is not sufficient...

Not to do with affirmative action but perhaps more to do with groups that have had a disproportionate amount of violence perpetrated based primarily on the fact they belong to a group...(Gays, immigrants, certain religious and ethnic minorities)...

I guess the position Senator Smith is taking is that hating someone simply because they are of a certain race, religion, sexual orientation, etc has a level of malevolence. The purpose of this legislation is to legislate tolerance. These are the types of protections that a Christian in a Muslim Nation, a white person in an African Nation, a Catholic in a Protestant Country (luck of the Irish), and gays just about every except certain European Nations do not enjoy.

The hate crimes law have good intent... However, (there is always a however) prosecutors and law enforcement spend a lot of time worried about hate crimes when the conventional wisdom is that they should spend time fighting crime and treat it all the same.

It may be another way that this country is trying to atone for historical wrongs...

The real question to me is "Does this legislation deter criminals from doing violence because of the awareness that there are harsher penalties if a hate based motivation can be proven..."

I think about the following statement someone said...

When they came for the Jews, I did not stand up because I am not Jewish.

When the came for the Catholics, I did not stand up because I am not Catholic.
etc....

When they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me...

I don't give in to the victim's mentality but the question is "Can we assess an additional penalty for what someone thinks?"

If you are a hispanic walking with a caucasian, if you are a white truck driverin South Central Los Angeles during a riot (Reginald Denny), that may be the only comfort and protection you have when you are the minority in a hostile environment...

Good intent but it can get so messed up when implemented...
8 posted on 08/13/2003 4:24:38 PM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mhking
By the way, as far I know, pre-meditated murder is usually Murder 1 and a punishable by death...Murder 2 is usually not intentional (heat of the moment, etc)

You might want to check with J.D.'s about manslaughter and felony murder...

By the way, I have been told pre-meditated murder can include doing a murder for hire...It is not a hate crime...It is nothing personnel...As Tom Hagen said in the Godfather, "It's just business."
9 posted on 08/13/2003 4:30:33 PM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: Old Sarge
Thanks for pinging the man!
11 posted on 08/13/2003 8:31:24 PM PDT by WaterDragon (America the beautiful, I love this nation of immigrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dwd1
The hate crimes law have good intent...

I disagree. The intent is to give special groups special identity - so that killing or harming them is WORSE than killing or harming others. This is unconstitutional, creates more hate and enmity, and just plain stupid. So if someone killed or harmed my old father, it wouldn't be as evil a crime as someone killing a homosexual. Sick. And adding homosexuals to the hate crime business is the cherry on the sick cake. Why should someone who practices same sex sodomy have special protection, or whatever the hate crimes bill is supposed to do? This is just a lawyer-fest, and the government creating a special classes of people heirarchy.

12 posted on 08/13/2003 8:33:14 PM PDT by First Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dwd1
I've heard liberal psychotherapists say that child rapists had the "intent" to show the child love!

Normal people consider the consequences of "good intentions" before implementing them. Liberals are content with "feeling good" about their "good intentions." It's all about THEM.
13 posted on 08/13/2003 8:34:04 PM PDT by WaterDragon (America the beautiful, I love this nation of immigrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: pram
I am not saying that there are not those whose intentions have nothing to do with doing the right thing... But please remember laws concerning domestic violence, statutory rape laws, the laws that are intended to protect the elderly from con men, SEC laws that are intended to protect investors, RICO Laws that protect the public from organized crime, drug laws that are harsh because of societies desire to discourage people from harming their bodies...Civil rights laws concerning privacy and the rights of the accused...

All of these laws have good intent but unpleasant side effects....

Please ask yourself what you would do if you were on the receiving end of the persecution endured by so many in this country for so many reasons...

A lot of these laws are a result of those members of our society that are scared... They are scared when police are not present...They are scared because they know that when authority figures and law enforcement are not present, there are those who do harm to those who are weaker simply because they can... As a society, we try to send a message to be vigilant in your behavior because one of the most important goals of society is to make all law abiding citizens feel safe and protected and we do accept persecution of the weak or those who may have a different way of thinking or living just because we can...

You have to remember that it was not so long ago that Matthew Shepard was killed, that Arabs who hate our way of life killed more than 3000 of us....That a man was dragged to death in a small Texas Town... That two young white kids were beaten and their girlfriends raped because they found themselves in the wrong neighborhood...

Until you walk a mile in the shoes of a person who has been persecuted because he is different, you may not be that understanding of the fact that he may need a little more protection than you...

14 posted on 08/13/2003 8:54:32 PM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cincysux
If you're gonna kill someone, just make sure you tell them that you love them first.
15 posted on 08/13/2003 8:55:42 PM PDT by July 4th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dwd1
Until you walk a mile in the shoes of a person who has been persecuted because he is different, you may not be that understanding of the fact that he may need a little more protection than you

No, still don't agree. First of all, how do you know that I haven't been persecuted against or people haven't been cruel to me because of perceived differences? Second, NO ONE deserves MORE protection than others. And for you to trot out Shepard's name when so many innocent children have been molested, raped and tortured by homosexuals is rather shameless. So by your logic the young boy who was tortured and murdered by two homosexuals is not a "hate crime" victim, just a regular victim.

If the laws against assault, murder and other harm are enforced properly, everyone is protected equally. And to make unconstitutional laws to make up for PAST harm is not only patently stupid, it creates another generation of injustice.

16 posted on 08/13/2003 9:00:48 PM PDT by First Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: WaterDragon
Normal is definitely a term that has different meaning depending on one's history, financial status, residence, and pugilistic capability...

As a moderate, I think the problem with liberals is not only thinking things through...The problem is one of not properly estimating the consequences...

Most men over six foot and 200 pounds don't see the reason for domestic violence laws...Doesn't mean the laws are not needed...

BTW, most pedophiles would not be classified as pedophiles if we did not have laws that are designed and intended to protect children from consenting to participation in sex acts with adults...
17 posted on 08/13/2003 9:01:20 PM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: pram
I do not know you and therefore I concede that you may have been persecuted for differences...It is never my intent to make anyone's pain appear insignificant...

By the way, as a person with children, I can assure you that the child labor laws which were designed to stop the terrible conditions children were forced to live in during the time that Upton Sinclair published "The Jungle", the laws which protect children from abuse from their parents, the laws which give child actors better financial protection, the laws that make statutory rape a crime, Megan's law which requires notification to a community of those who have committed sex crimes against children, the Amber Alerts which place the safe return of children that are in danger of being sexually abused....I thank God for all of these laws... I have called the police to go to my children's home in TX because my daughter was talking to me on the phone and it went dead...I could not get her back on the line...I called the police and they were more than happy to go and perform a "Welfare Check"...

I am not sure what you mean when you say "past wrongs"... I thought we have laws that allow us to bring to court any perceived injustices and allow a jury to decide if there is a need for corrective action... We do have a tradition in this country of taking responsibility when we have made a mistake and trying to make things right... We don't have to overdo it but I do think that is how we have done things as a society...

Regarding the homosexuals who have mistreated or abused children, I would never even try to defend such behavior and I think there are sex offender laws that deal with these individuals very well... However, if children are not adequately protected, I would be the first to suggest that laws need to be passed to provide the necessary protection...

18 posted on 08/13/2003 9:17:40 PM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: pram
I guess that one's perception of a need to correct past wrongs depends on which end of the injustice you were on...

One thing that you do bring up that is interesting...Is it a hate crime when two athletic or well armed homosexuals commit an offense (murder, rape, etc) and the primary reason behind the attack is because they just want to pay back someone who is part of group that they feel has persecuted them...

I would say that there is an added level of malevelonce if a gay person would get together with several of his friends and beat the crap out of a young heterosexual couple that is doing nothing but taking a walk and minding it's own business... I would consider that a hate crime... The problem is that whatever the law is, we all have to follow them and you are absolutely correct that there needs to be equal application and enforcement of the law...

Two edged sword...but fair...
19 posted on 08/13/2003 9:28:05 PM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: pram
I would be willing to concede that there is no need for hate crimes legislation...

If you would be willing to concede that we are a long way off from equal enforcement of the law...

I noticed you said
"If the laws against assault, murder and other harm are enforced properly, everyone is protected equally. "

Let me know when that happens...I will be waiting very patiently... I have the feeling it may not happen before my 50th birthday... I would love to be wrong about this...
20 posted on 08/13/2003 9:36:42 PM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dwd1
"I would be willing to concede that there is no need for hate crimes legislation...

"If you would be willing to concede that we are a long way off from equal enforcement of the law..."

Whatever makes you think the former has anything to do with the latter?

If laws are being equally enforced, then there is no need for hate crime laws.

And, if they are not being enforced equally, how will hate crime laws make it any different?

Hate crime laws are designed solely for the purpose of political pandering to "victim" groups. They have no other purpose. Other than undermining the Constitution, of course...

21 posted on 08/13/2003 10:40:38 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Because the question which you do not want to discuss is whether hate crime legislation deters crime... I do not know if it does... I fall into only one group that falls victim to hate crimes...
You might want to ask women why they have felt a need for the stronger enforcement of domestic violence laws or even the existence of domestic laws...

I have the feeling they may tell you it is because of their vulnerability in personal relationships...

I would be interested to know if you have a position on whether women need more protection from men or vice versa...

Other than that one group membership, I don't walk around worried about much... But after the history in this country which you and I are well aware of, I do think it is a good thing that the laws have been changed because there was a time when I was considered 3/5 of a person, there was a time when I would not have been allowed to vote, there was a time when I would have faced some very difficult barriers to housing and employment regardless of my qualifications...and there were times when my complaints of persecution and violence fell on deaf ears...

Also, I was curious if you have an opinion as to whether the extra punishment that is levied against those who kill police officers in the line of duty is warranted or is murder simply murder?...

When you talk about equal enforcement, you have to look at who is in law enforcement and understand that these are human beings who make decisions based on the law but also based on their own feelings. They have discretion to arrest or not and I don't have a major problem with that... I just think it needs to be recognized that there may have been and may still be a tendency to look the other way if the citizen being protected is not necessarily "mainstream", member of a community of a different culture (etc.)

There is also another concern... I would not want to see a gay person feel that he needs to carry a concealed weapon because he feels that persons can assault him at will and the law will do nothing or less to protect him... We may have a case one day where those persons with a lifestyle not approved by the majority of persons in this country are able to plead self defense...

Do we let those that feel persecuted and have been persecuted take the law into their own hands or do we let them know that they are as welcome in this country as anyone else?

I don't think I want to see Muslims or Jews doing the same... I don't want to see high school kids carrying guns because they feel the juvenile justice system does not protect them from other kids who are undeterred by the laws we have on the books... Even the Mormon church had to migrate west at one time to avoid religious persecution...
And though they had a well armed militia, they still faced trouble simply because of their beliefs...

I don't think it was that long ago that churches in the South, Synagogues, and Mosques were being served molotov cocktails... It was like happy hour on churches...

I have to admit that I never had in such fear of that happening while attending the first Baptist Church in Muleshoe, TX.

The Amish Communities face "Clayping" and other persecution... If you were or are a member of these communities and the law was equally enforced, your history would be a lot different...

I am no authority but I tend to believe that people that want hate crime protection are scared.... They are not scared because they want tax credits or they want a free ride... Their fear is a reaction to the unlawful acts they have faced. They simply want to be able to enjoy the freedom that the "Constitution" provides. That equal protection thing is wonderful but it is just a piece of paper... If you think that the equal protection law is going to stop skin heads from attacking immigrants or those of a certain religion, that it will deter gang bangers from jumping on some Marines and stabbing them, I will wait patiently for that to happen...

And I hope you know that it was not that long ago that
the Federal Government had to bring federal prosecutions against police and other citizens who did violence to "fellow citizens"... Where was the equal protection clause then...

As I said before, I think support for this law depends on which end of the stick you have been on...

22 posted on 08/14/2003 6:25:13 AM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: okie01
I think that the key word is "If"...I am not going to get into some smart-alecked "if statements" but I think you may want to consider that possibility that the "if" in your statement has a way to go before being removed... Persons that are being mistreated should not have to wait for that "if" to be the reality and not simply a goal we would all like to see come to fruition...

By the way, do you think the death penalty deters crime or is it simply societies expression of rage and our legal display of contempt at certain behavior....Behavior so unacceptable, we are willing to end your life if you engage in it...
23 posted on 08/14/2003 6:31:23 AM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Are you sure that the real problem is not with the laws but who the law is about?

I am no fan of the gay lifestyle, I am certainly not a practitioner of Islam, I am not Jewish, I am not female, I am not under 18, I am not Catholic, I am not Amish (but I can speak German),I am not Mexican, I am not an illegal alien, I am not Mormon, I am not Asian, I am not gay....I may or may not approve or get along with people from these various groups...It is possible that I dislike these persons simply because they are a member of one of the groups...I may even hate these people...That is perfectly legal... But if I let my hate of a member of one of these groups guide my actions and serve as the primary motivations for my getting a gun and blowing the first one of these people I run into away...
24 posted on 08/14/2003 6:41:20 AM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dwd1
"Are you sure that the real problem is not with the laws but who the law is about?"

I am personally offended that you might believe I harbor such an odious notion. But I understand why you ask.

The answer is: Yes, I am absolutely certain that my real problem is with the law, not who the law might be about.

I am firmly against the law treating any one person differently from any other. That goes for both hate crimes and so-called affirmative action.

At the same time, I recognize that some people will get preferential treatment, others abusive treatment. But that is not restricted to matters of race. It has to do with money, station, age, or even characteristics so frivolous as size, appearance, or clothing, etc.

In such cases, the problem is not with the law, it is with the offender. Be it an authority, who abuses a minority. Or an employer who doesn't avail himself of the most qualified help, because of some kind of bias. Or it might even lie with the offended, who can't get over a slight -- real or imagined -- and move on with his or her life.

At some level, we all discriminate...and are discriminated against. I myself am prejudiced -- against lying, cheating and stealing, which are not exclusive to any race, gender or sexual persuasion.

The law is designed to punish criminal acts. By anybody, against anybody. It should not be asked to play favorites.

25 posted on 08/14/2003 9:49:35 AM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: okie01
I meant no offense but our prejudices define each and every one of us. I share many of your same concerns. People that know me well would tell you that I try to understand why as opposed to what so intent is very important to me. I have lived in places from Guthrie (your original state capital) to Ramstein Germany to Naples Italy and now here in CA. I still believe that most people try to do the right thing. I also believe others do not know how... You do have a point that some people want to call a lawyer rather than working something out because of their history... I think we both want to see that stop...

Thank you for the discussion...
26 posted on 08/14/2003 10:02:34 AM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: pram
”I disagree. The intent is to give special groups special identity - so that killing or harming them is WORSE than killing or harming others.

As far as I know, the prosecution for “hate” crimes is not focused on protecting any special group or identity. For instance, a number of black people have had the “hate” crime designation attached to crimes against white people. The crime these people are convicted of is not “hate” but rather assault or murder. The designation of “hate” crime adds to the punishment.

This idea may, I think, may come into play with regard to crimes committed by terrorists against Americans as well. In this case, any additional punishment is welcomed.

27 posted on 08/14/2003 10:30:14 AM PDT by thtr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: thtr
What would you suggest as "an additional punishment" to the death penalty for murder?
28 posted on 08/14/2003 1:23:47 PM PDT by WaterDragon (America the beautiful, I love this nation of immigrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: thtr
For politicians, "hate crime" laws are a special-interest-group-vote-getter. Period. They leave it to those susceptible to twist and turn logic and morality to justify such idiocies.
29 posted on 08/14/2003 1:26:31 PM PDT by WaterDragon (America the beautiful, I love this nation of immigrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: dwd1
I can see a lot of discussion has taken place since I was on this thread, and I haven't read all of it. But I just wanted to respond to your last comments to me.
It is true that justice is not applied equally, no doubt about it. But creating extra punishments or special categories of crimes depending to which group of people the victim belongs, belittles those who are not members of such designated groups.

As far as special laws protecting children, or the elderly, these are special groups by their nature, being ill-equipped to defend themselves.
And as far as justice not being applied fairly, as long as we are in this mortal world it will ever be so. Adding hate crimes legislation is just another layer of injustice.

What is needed is a more moral people. Piling law upon law will not help. As long as people are educated in the "religion" of secular humanism/moral relativity, injstice and cruelty will only get worse and worse. What keeps human beings from being worse than beasts in the forest is not laws, but conscience. And to hear one's conscience, one needs training in some form of religion.

I would be considered by most here on FR to be a "member" of a minority religion, but all the great monotheistic religions have broadly speaking the same moral codes. That's what we need more of, not law piled upon unconstitutional law, misapplied by humans who are more and more riddled with moral flaws.
31 posted on 08/14/2003 3:51:04 PM PDT by First Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dwd1
I would not want to see a gay person feel that he needs to carry a concealed weapon because he feels that persons can assault him at will and the law will do nothing or less to protect him...

You really ought to educate yourself about the homosexual agenda, and in the archives of FR there is more information in one place than probably anywhere on the web. Just because a person practices same sex sodomy in no way gives that person any special rights, privileges, or advantages. In fact, such a person is suffering from SSAD (Same Sex Attraction Disorder), they are shortening their life spans, acquiring and spreading many diseases, some incurable, and they are more prone to molest and seduce children and young adolescents than the rest of us. So please don't add them to the victim list.

Another point - if law enforcement and the justice departments actually punished those who really break the law, there would be a great disincentive to wouldbe law breakers. First of all, a proper use of the death penalty for murderers and child molesters, swift and sure, would be a start.

32 posted on 08/14/2003 3:59:26 PM PDT by First Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: WaterDragon
Hate crimes do not only include murder and not all murders result in the death penalty. The 1994 Hate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act provides for longer sentences where the offense is determined to be a hate crime. Hate crimes cover a broad area including vandalism crimes against Christian churches and Jewish synagogues as well as attacks on the clergy.

I agree with you that “hate crime” legislation are a ”special-interest-group-vote-getter”, but such legislation is offered and promoted by both liberals and conservatives.

33 posted on 08/14/2003 4:23:25 PM PDT by thtr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: pram
I understand how you feel... I am no specialist on that particular part of society...I just hope they never outlaw black men and italiam women (go franco harris)...I really like her cooking...

Thank you for the discussion...

34 posted on 08/14/2003 4:55:33 PM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: pram
I think pursuit of more encouraging more moral people would be treating the disease and not just the symptoms. Well said...
35 posted on 08/14/2003 5:01:02 PM PDT by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dwd1
Thanks for the discussion from my side too. Another point I find offensive (and I would think you would too!) is how the "gay rights" activists are trying to get credit on the coat tails of the legitimate civil rights issue of black people. I noticed on your info page that you are black. Being born black, or Asian or any race or ethnicity is a neutral, unchangeable reality. No one has ever changed their race or their ethnicity. But there are thousands of ex-homosexuals, and also people who decided to become or act "gay". So homosexuality is a certain type of activity, it is not in any way similar to a racial identity. It is a group identity only in that it involves certain actions, which are notoriously unhealthy, conisdered immoral since time immemorial, destructive to young people, etc. How can this compare to being born black, which is not a choice, and is completely benign or neutral?
To me, this is really trying to take advantage of the legitimate struggle and pain that black people have undergone and suffered throughout the years.
36 posted on 08/14/2003 8:12:42 PM PDT by First Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: WaterDragon
Doesn't sound like the Gordon Smith I know. More details needed.
37 posted on 08/14/2003 8:18:50 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
I read some time ago that Sen. Gordon Smith was promoting the hate crimes crapola. I'm from OR so I was even more irritated. I emailed or called his office just to vent. He's an icky senator but what's the alternative?
38 posted on 08/14/2003 10:15:54 PM PDT by First Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: pram
**what's the alternative?**

I'll keep the (R)Republican behind his name for the present.

39 posted on 08/15/2003 9:01:38 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: dwd1
Democrats and the NAACP's New Slavery, by Tammy Bruce.
40 posted on 08/16/2003 10:59:44 AM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson