Federal legislation on hate crimes a concern for pulpits
- Nov 27, 2007 - comment
As a congressional conference committee seeks compromise on the Defense Authorization Act for 2008, hate crimes legislation attached to the bill continues to concern some political and religious leaders.
The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 passed both the U.S. House and Senate earlier this year. The bill is currently in conference committee to work out differences between the House and Senate versions, and a vote is expected before the end of the year. The hate crimes bill also is referred to as the Matthew Shepard Act, named for a homosexual Wyoming college student murdered in 1998.
In May, President George W. Bush’s administration stated its opposition to the bill, calling it “unnecessary and constitutionally questionable.” In late September, White House press secretary Dana Perino stated that the administration’s position had not changed but did not state whether the president would veto the legislation.
Many state and national Christian leaders, including James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Joe Bob Mizzell of the Alabama Baptist State Board of Missions and Dan Ireland of Alabama Citizens Action Program (ALCAP), oppose the bill.
“All crimes strictly are hate crimes,” said Ireland, executive director of ALCAP. “The problem we have with [this bill] is when you add sexual orientation, you are equating that with race and religion.”
The proposed legislation would amend the current federal hate crimes law, which prohibits willingly injuring, intimidating or interfering with any person or attempting to do so by the use or threat of force because of that person’s race, color, religion or national origin.
The new bill would add offenses attributed to “gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability” bias to current hate crimes law and “provide federal assistance to [states], local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes.” Under the bill, hate crimes would include offenses motivated by “actual” bias, as well as offenses motivated by “perceived” bias.
Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby voted against the amendment, citing the vague language of the bill and the lack of a clear definition of “perceived.” He also echoed the worries of those who question why crimes against individuals in certain groups would be more important than crimes against other individuals.
Classifying crime
“I am concerned that hate crimes legislation would set up different classes of people for special protection under the law,” Shelby said. “I believe we must be tough on all criminals, regardless of their motives. Individuals who commit violent crimes should be dealt with surely and effectively.”
Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions also voted against the legislation and spoke on the Senate floor during debate on the act, expressing concern about expanding federal reach into crimes currently prosecuted by states.
“We have no record to indicate there is a shortage or a lack of willingness to prosecute [hate-type crimes against homosexuals],” he said, citing evidence of “aggressive prosecutions” at the state level for such crimes.
“[It] would be a tragic thing indeed if this [defense] bill would be vetoed as a result of this extraneous piece of controversial legislation,” Sessions said.
Ireland and other Christian leaders worry about the impact of the legislation on preachers, primarily regarding free speech issues.
“If a preacher cites Scripture about homosexuality and somebody in that crowd gets excited about it and commits a crime against a homosexual, then blames the preacher for saying something, is the preacher guilty?” Ireland said. “There’s the possibility that [as a law, this] could impair what you would say based on your convictions concerning the Bible, which would jeopardize what a church can teach and promote.”
Dobson, founder and chairman of the board of Focus on the Family, also believes the legislation may lead to restrictions on the expression of convictions. “The [hate crimes act] will be the first step to criminalize our rights as Christians to believe that some behaviors are sinful,” he said.
A group of interfaith clergy calling itself Clergy Against Hate, however, disagrees about the legislation’s potential effect on religious speech. It has spoken out in support of the bill with an open letter to the president and members of Congress signed by numerous clergy members, including 10 from Alabama.
“As people of faith we also know that free speech is a precious right. We would not support a bill that did not contain ample protections for free speech, including preaching and statements of religious belief,” the letter said. “This law does not criminalize or impede religious expression in any way. Rather, the bill specifically addresses violent acts by those who act on their hate to terrorize entire communities.”
In 2005, the last year for which statistics are available, law enforcement agencies reported 7,160 single-bias hate crime incidents. Of the crimes reported, more than half, 55 percent, were motivated by racial bias, while 17 percent was motivated by religious bias. Bias against sexual orientation accounted for 14 percent of those reported.
In Alabama, the reported incidence of hate crimes is low. In 2004, only three incident reports were filed by participating agencies. In 2005, there were no reports filed.
Still Christians in Alabama are concerned. Eric Johnston, president and general counsel with Southeast Law Institute in Birmingham, wrote a resolution condemning the legislation to be presented at the Alabama Baptist State Convention annual meeting Nov. 13–14 in Mobile.
“Our position is that we don’t want to give recognition to sexual orientation as a protected civil right,” he said. “All the hate crime law does is add an additional penalty to the crime because of the victim, and we don’t want to put a politically correct label on a crime.”
This article is reprinted from the November 15, 2007, issue of The Alabama Baptist, the newspaper of the Alabama Baptist State Convention.
Further Learning
Learn more about: Family, Sexual Purity, Homosexuality, Citizenship, Legislation