Foes: Gay hate crimes bill could target churches
- Apr 29, 2009 - 6 -
Legislation to extend hate crimes protections to homosexuals and transgendered individuals could severely restrict religious freedom, foes of the proposal said April 28 as they sought to rally opposition.
Members of the House of Representatives and leaders of evangelical Christian and conservative organizations, including the Southern Baptist Convention’s ethics entity, warned about the bill’s impact at a Capitol Hill news conference on the eve of the measure’s consideration in the House. The Democratic leadership was expected to bring the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, H.R. 1913, to the House floor April 29.
The measure would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the current classes — including race, religion and national origin — protected from hate crimes. “Sexual orientation” includes homosexuality, while “gender identity,” or transgendered status, takes in transsexuals and cross-dressers.
“This bill puts Christians and many other religious groups in the government’s crosshairs,” Barrett Duke said at the news conference. Duke is vice president for public policy and research of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.
“While we should never condone acts of violence against anyone, for whatever reason, including whether or not that person is a homosexual, this bill proposes to prosecute someone based on their belief about homosexuality and therefore makes religious belief a germane issue in this debate,” Duke said. “Anyone who holds a religiously based belief about homosexuality is immediately suspect of engaging in a hate crime if a homosexual is involved, even if the person was unaware that the victim was a homosexual.
“Those who teach that homosexuality is contrary to God’s design may find that they as well are targeted by this law,” Duke said.
Current law, combined with the hate crimes measure, could cause problems for Christians and other religious adherents who believe homosexual behavior is a sin, said Rep. Louie Gohmert, R.-Texas.
“If you aid or counsel or induce someone to commit a crime, then you are just as guilty as the one who committed the crime” under existing law, said Gohmert, a member of a Southern Baptist church. “[I]f you can say that someone’s ‘sexual orientation’ is against Bible teaching or the teaching of the Tanach or the Koran, then you have just said that something is wrong, and if that stirs someone or induces someone to go out and commit an act of violence, which all of us are against, then just the inducement would be enough to go after a minister, a rabbi or an imam who says, for example, ‘Homosexuality, under the teachings of the Bible, the Tanach, the Koran, it’s wrong.’
“That could be argued to induce criminal conduct,” Gohmert said at the news conference. “And that would allow pastors to be arrested for saying things are wrong.
“It would not take too many arrests to have an extraordinary, chilling effect on some religious teachings with regard to homosexuality.”
The bill’s opponents not only charge it could infringe on religious liberty, but they say current state laws make it unnecessary; it would grant protection based on behavior; it would threaten free-speech rights; and it would move federal law toward punishing thoughts and beliefs, since the motivation of a person charged with a hate crime would have to be evaluated.
Supporters of the legislation deny it would target religious freedom and free-speech rights. Backing the measure are homosexual-rights advocates and their allies, including the ACLU, NAACP, Anti-Defamation League and People for the American Way.
The House appears ready to pass the bill, but Gohmert said the late outcry could be helpful.
“They probably have the votes to pass it in the House,” Gohmert told Baptist Press after the news conference. “In the Senate, there should be senators who are scared to death who are coming up for election because [of opposition to the legislation in their states]…. And if there were no noise made here as it comes through the House, the senators would think they are safe, and they’re not safe. They’re at risk, and they need to understand that.”
Other House members who spoke against the legislation at the news conference were Republican Reps. Paul Broun of Georgia, Trent Franks of Arizona and Jim Jordan of Ohio. Broun and Franks are both members of Southern Baptist churches. Among other organizations represented at the news conference were Concerned Women for America, High Impact Leadership Coalition, Traditional Values Coalition and National Black Church Initiative.
If the bill gains congressional approval, President Obama is expected to sign it.
The House and Senate both passed similar legislation in 2007. Under threat of a veto from President Bush, the houses failed to agree on a final version.
The legislation would authorize the U.S. attorney general to provide assistance to state and local officials in the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes. The bill says a hate crime is one “motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim or is a violation of the State, local, or Tribal hate crime laws.”
The penalty for a hate crime could be as much as 10 years in prison or, in some cases, up to a life sentence.
Further Learning
Learn more about: Family, Sexual Purity, Homosexuality, Citizenship, Legislation, Religious Liberty
Comments are closed. Please use our contact form if you have any thoughts or questions.
comments
1 On Apr 30th, 2009, at 10:56am, Sally wrote:
The act only pertains to an act of Violence! If the person is not harmed then no charge is set against you. This act is not focused toward religious beliefs it is focused on anyone who commits an act of violence on an innocent person. No one is being prosecuted for having a belief they are only prosecuting people who act on that belief by injuring another person. Everyone still has their free will to believe whatever they want to believe in, but, No One whatever your beliefs are or your sexuality is has the right to commit a crime against another person for who they are.
You wouldn’t commit a violent act against a person of a different race or religion would you? NO! You wouldn’t. So why should you commit a violent act against someone who loves differently than you.
No one is asking that you support these people or change your beliefs! All that this law states is that you cannot commit an act of violence or an act of hate against another human being.
2 On Apr 30th, 2009, at 12:30pm, David Self wrote:
If this rationale is followed, then anyone who watches violence on TV can copycat a crime. (This does happen.) Hate legislation should then include any person who incites such viloence whether the producer intendeds it or not. This would also impact the church’s telling the story of the crucifixion as it might incite an imoral act against a Jew.
Conversely if the Christian community is in the minority and a gay activist group incites violence against the church, it too should be viewed as hate speech.
What this all boils down to is an increased restriction on the 1st Amendment. The church has a right to complain when it goes against us, and we often do,but we learn to live with it. May I suggest that all Americans do the same and leave this issue alone.
If you don’t its because you hate me. lol
3 On May 1st, 2009, at 7:33am, James wrote:
“The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act / Matthew Shepard Act gives the Justice Department the power to investigate and prosecute bias-motivated violence by providing the department with jurisdiction over crimes of violence where the perpetrator has selected the victim because of the person’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. “
http://www.hrc.org/sites/hatecrimes/about_the_bill.asp
4 On May 1st, 2009, at 1:19pm, Pastor David L. Shelley, Ph.D. wrote:
HR 1913 is bad because it creates unequal justice and seeks to punish motive rather than behavior. Violence against a homosexual person is already punishable by law, and motive is irrelevant (except on t.v. shows!). This bill would give greater punishment to offenders who’s crimes are “perceived” to be motivated by hatred toward a protected class (which homosexuals are not) than to offenders who’s crimes are simply crimes. The perception of hatred cannot be proved, and motive is never considered relevant in criminal prosecutions anyway. This bill will put police in the impossible position of having to determine and prove motive. Finally, a person who can be proved to “aid, abet, induce or assist” a violent crime is also considered an accomplice to the crime. Pastors could be arrested as an accomplice if someone within their congregation or even the sound of their voice commits a crime against a person who engages in homosexual behavior.
5 On May 7th, 2009, at 3:16pm, Roger A. Smith wrote:
I think would be terrible for this legislation ever came
passed Congress. I’ve heard to many bad thing about the
bill. Please vote it down - if you can.
6 On May 7th, 2009, at 3:59pm, Betty A Wilson (secretary to church of over 200 me wrote:
My name is Betty Wilson. I am a church secretary. This bill is against anything we believe in. We love people and try each day to encourage others to show compassion and love. But, we feel that homosexuality and the HR 1913 is wrong. Our Country was founded on Christian principles. I will encourage everyone in the future to vote against ANYONE who supports this bill. Please vote against the Hate Crimes Act (Hr 1913). As John Kennedy once stated: It’s not what my country can do for me, but what I can do for my country. The reason I am writing is: It’s not what the future childre of America can do for me, but what I can do for them. May God bless you and all our children.