New FBI Hate Crime Statistics Expose Homosexual Lies

Washington, DC – Congress is currently debating passage of the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 (S. 625), a pro-homosexual hate crimes bill promoted by Senator Ted Kennedy and 50 co-sponsors. This legislation begins with this somber comment: "The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem."

This introduction to S. 625 is filled with lies and half-truths about the nature of hate crimes in America—yet this bill is being seriously debated—despite the facts. The recently released FBI hate crime statistics for 2000 shed new light on what Ted Kennedy alleges is a "serious national problem."

Most Americans are tolerant and compassionate individuals who do not wish anyone to be harmed. Unfortunately, homosexual activists have exploited this compassion in the promotion of the idea of "hate crime" legislation. A "hate crime" law typically includes enhanced penalties against an individual for his negative thoughts when he committed a crime against a person who is part of a protected class. For example, a common thug who mugs a lesbian for her purse will receive a higher penalty for his anti-homosexual thoughts or motivations than if he had mugged a woman simply for her money.

Homosexuals have been successful in getting many states and communities to add "sexual orientation" as a protected category under hate crime laws. This creates what amounts to "thought crimes" and unequal justice under the law for those not given protected class status.

The FBI’s newly released hate crime statistics should be welcomed news to homosexuals. The latest hate crime numbers have been posted on the FBI’s web site. According to the FBI, there were a total of 11.6 million crimes reported to law enforcement officials in 2000. Of those, an estimated 1.4 million were violent crimes.

The FBI hate crime statistics show the following: In 2000, there were a total of 8,152 hate crimes reported involving a total of 9,524 distinct incidents. Out of a total of 8,144 single-bias incidents, for example, 5,206 were racially motivated and 1,568 were bias crimes against a person’s religion.

The FBI says the most common hate crime was that of "intimidation" with a total of 3,294 cases. A person who was "intimidated" was a victim of profanity, racial slurs, or verbal threats by another individual. In short, a third of these hate crimes were non-violent and amounted to name-calling. The other two-thirds involved violence against property, (2,766 offenses) simple assault (1,616 offenses), and aggravated assault (1,274).

Overall, there were only 1,517 hate crimes of bias committed because of a person’s actual or perceived sexual orientation in 2000. It is likely that at least a third of these were intimidation or name-calling. The FBI gathered these statistics from 11,691 law enforcement agencies encompassing a total of 237 million Americans—or 84.2% of the entire population.

No compassionate American is in favor of someone being verbally or physically assaulted because of his sexual preferences, but neither should we be subjected to thought crime legislation that provides special legal protections to homosexuals not accorded other Americans. Criminalizing a person’s views on sexual behavior should not be a matter of federal law.

Out of 11.6 million crimes committed against persons and property in 2000, only 1,517 were hate crimes directed at homosexuals—and a third of these were undoubtedly name-calling. This should be good news to homosexual activists, but it undercuts one of their primary objectives: The passage of federal hate crime legislation that will add homosexual behavior as a protected class status under federal civil rights laws.

Homosexuals and their allies in Congress—notably Barney Frank in the House and Ted Kennedy in the Senate, have repeatedly claimed that our nation is experiencing an epidemic of hate crimes against homosexuals. They claim that states and local communities are incapable of dealing effectively with this wave of crime against homosexuals, so the federal government must step in to protect homosexuals from this assault. This, of course, is untrue.

Congress is currently considering several pieces of legislation that will provide federal special rights for homosexuals and punish criticism of homosexuality. These include provisions within the omnibus education bill (H.R. 1 and S. 1); ENDA, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (S. 1284); and S. 625.

If these bills pass with hate crime provisions, homosexuals will gain access to millions of tax dollars to fund pro-homosexual recruitment programs in our nation’s schools.

All of these bills contain "hate crime" language that is based upon lies and pro-homosexual rhetoric. Facts are irritating things that often get in the way of the homosexual agenda. The FBI’s recent statistics showing how few hate crimes were committed against homosexuals in 2000 are irritations that will undoubtedly be ignored by activists. The truth has undercut their claims of an epidemic of hate crimes against homosexuals, but that won’t stop them from attempting to gain special rights under federal law for their preferred sexual behavior.

It is our hope that Congress will carefully examine these new FBI hate crime statistics before being stampeded into passing S. 625 or other laws based upon lies and misinformation from homosexual activist groups.

Traditional Values Coalition is an inter-denominational public policy organization comprising over 43,000 member churches. For more information call Steve Aiken at (202) 547-8570. TVC, 139 C Street, SE, Washington, DC 20003. Web address: www.traditionalvalues.org.

re:
"...For example, a common thug who mugs a lesbian for
her purse will receive a higher penalty for his anti-homosexual
thoughts or motivations than if he had mugged a woman
simply for her money......"

In my opinion, that's absolutely correct. And it's
one reason I don't support any "hate crime" legislation.

However, the data that's cited is flawed. To use
that flawed data to promote any "anti" agenda, is
equally flawed.

Most sex crimes do not get reported as such. Most clients
that do seek assistance, desire to keep the sexual nature.
or references to it, out of the claim. When it's learned
that it cannot be stifled, they usually will decide not to
bring charges. That skews the report.

The "lesbian" that gets robbed may or may not attempt
to use "sexual harassment" as part of her claim. A gay
or bisexual male rarely if ever, will want to make it publicly
known in police reports or court actions.

As much violence we see towards "gays"; beatings,
assaults, and killings, I do not support calling it a
"hate crime" and appointing any additional penalty
for it. A death is a death, and a human is a human.

Likewise, having a minimum life-sentence penalty
[or death penalty] for the killing of a law enforcement
officer is also nothing I support. It encourages
the mentality that one human is superior to another
by nature of their job. It is no different than the
current "hate crime" legislation.

(That's my 2 cents).

Thanks.

As much violence we see towards "gays";

I think that was the point. The FBI report doesn't show anything to support your statement, "As much violence [as] we see towards 'gays';" Do you see it personally? Your claim that it's out there but underreported doesn't actually amount to a fact that should be claimed by anyone.

It is entirely possible that violence against gays because of their orientation is rare. Evidence proved that Matthew Shepherd was not killed because he was gay, but because the thugs who killed him were non-discriminating thugs. Shepherd was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. It was heralded as violence against a gay man, but there is no evidence that it was.

Not that facts ever bothered anyone with an agenda.

Shalom.

re:
"..Do you see it personally?..."

In a word, yes. I have. I know many, many individuals
that have suffered from severe beatings. Most will not
file charges for fear of being exposed. And a civil suit
does not do the justice that is deserved.

The statistics are incorrect in that report. If you sincerely
believe that the situation does not exist in the proportion
it is "rumored" to be, I would only suggest you take some
time away from your computer and see what's really going
on outside.

It always bothers me when some clown takes a single
incident and attempts to "prove" that single incident sets
precedence for all.

Whatever the facts of that "Shepherd" case that you have
desired to believe, Mr. Shepherd died after he revealed
he was gay. There was no other "preamble".
[ref: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/shepard1.shtml ]

And to help you understand better:
"...McKinney's defense told jurors in opening statements Monday,
it was Shepard himself who sent Mckinney into an uncontrollable
rage by making an unwelcome sexual advance......."
[ref: http://www.courttv.com/trials/mckinney/102599_ctv.html ]

I trust that helps you see things a bit more clearly?

Thanks.

In a word, yes. I have.

So you have seen every homosexual who was attacked solely for his/her homosexuality and know precisely the percentage of the population that suffers for it?

I don't doubt that people suffer for their sexual lifestyles. My only point is that there are sources for statistics. Feelings or anecdotal evidence can't be sources for statistics. You have to have something to back it up. Just saying something like, "For every reported hate crime there are 10 that go unreported" isn't proof. In fact, it's dangerous because it represents a false sense of accuracy. You might be able to say, "Not all hate crimes are reported," but that's all you can say. To characterize it better, they would have to be reported.

The focus isn't on whether people are hurt because of their sexual lifestyles. It is on whether the particular statistics often quoted in support of the homosexual agenda have any data behind them.

Shalom.

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.