My vote for President (no, not her husband, HER!)
From
HRC Back Story:
Elizabeth Edwards, wife of former Senator John Edwards, reiterated her support for GLBT equality at HRC's San Francisco Gala Dinner on Saturday and said that her husband would be a leader on turning over anti-gay discriminatory laws affecting same-sex couples. Edwards also used her speech to decry President Bush's misguided opposition to the hate crimes bill in light of the recent attack of Satendar Singh, a Fijan immigrant and California resident who recently died from injuries sustained during an alleged anti-gay and racist hate crime attack:
"This president talks a lot about good and evil and the need to seek out evil doers," she told a packed auditorium. "But he doesn't seem to recognize the evil in hate crimes. The right to live without the fear of being murdered for whom we love is not a special right."
From HRC Back Story: 
2 comments:
I think you are a little bit confused, Pooky. When it comes to protection against murder, the law already treats people equally, inasmuch as it punishes perpetrators without regard for what might or might not have motivated those perpetrators to commit such crimes.
The effect of hate crimes legislation would be to undermine the principle of equality by attaching special penalties to crimes which were motivated by certain types of ideas or beliefs.
You seem to equate opposition to hate crimes legislation with support for hate crimes themselves. It is that view, and not President Bush's view, which is misguided.
Regardless of whether or not one approves of homosexuality, no rational person could approve of incidents such as the attack of Satendar Singh. No rational person disputes that it is evil to attack and murder people.
But that's not what this issue is all about. This issue is about the attempts of the GLBT community to steamroll opponents of their views into submission by slanderously implying that anyone who is not in favor of special (and therefore unequal) rights for minorities is guilty of advocating hate crimes against such people.
The law does not treat people equally, just like it didn't during the civil rights era. Those cases are finally being reopened to properly punish those hate crimes.
If your "idea or belief" is that murdering a homosexual is what God wants, you should be killed so you cannot reproduce and spread your views of hate to your children.
I think a hate crime should carry with it more severe punishment. The act is more severe and deliberate, the punishment should reflect that.
Mark it sounds to me like you're just against every piece of legislation that says "homosexual". I believe you think finally labeling homosexuals as an actual group is the first step in "allowing" a lifestyle you disagree with. You may think homosexuality is a choice or a disease. You're wrong. I can say that with every bit of confidence. You are dead wrong.
There are hate crimes being committed against homosexuals. Therefore they need specific legislation to protect them. If there were hate crimes against white men as a group, the same would apply. I wasn't aware that protection against hate crimes was a "special (and therefore unequal) right". That's ridiculous.
Blocking LGBT legislation is not going to save any souls. It's not going to force those people to change their minds and become straight. Leave your Christianity in your home, blog, and own life. We don't want it in our laws.
Post a Comment