Christians claim hate crimes law an effort to ‘eradicate’ their beliefs

[babsbunny]

http://rawstory.com/2010/02/christians-claim-hate-crimes-law-effort-eradicate-beliefs/

By Stephen C. Webster
Saturday, February 6th, 2010 -- 2:15 pm

A Christian group in Michigan has filed a lawsuit alleging that a package of hate crimes laws named after murder victim Matthew Shepard is an affront to their religious freedom.

Far from the intended purpose of severely punishing criminals who commit unspeakable acts against a persecuted minority group, the religious activists claim the laws are a guarded effort to "eradicate" their beliefs.

[LeftishBrit]

1. Well, I daresay some people would agree with their point of view. Bin Laden, for example....

[GoneOffShore]

2. Religion should be a hobby - like making ships out of matchsticks.

[Orrex]

3. If only it were that easy.

(To eradicate faux-Christian we-are-His-chosen-and-can-do-no-wrong beliefs, that is.) Not the actual, Sermon-on-the-Mount types of Christians.

[KonaKane]

4. Eradicate what beliefs, exactly?

The one about beating a homosexual kid to a pulp and then crucifying him on a fence?

[baldguy]

5. It's their First Amendment right to torture & kill unbelievers.

[biscotti]

6. These people get more bazaar

by the day. Loons :crazy:

[GoneOffShore]

26. Their shopping habits annoy me too.

And their thought processes are beyond bizarre.

[DailyGrind51]

7. If they believe in hate, fuck yeah!

[MadBadger]

8. That really is an awful title.

Christian group, but not the way you framed it.

[TokenQueer]

14. Oh please...

:eyes:

[tbyg52]

35. Well, are any *other* Christian groups denouncing this group? nt

[MadBadger]

37. DU Christians are

Which probably means an overwhelming amount of Liberal Christians think this group sucks.

[tbyg52]

41. Good. I hope they will get vocal about it, not just on DU. nt

[Toasterlad]

44. Those Liberal Christians Are Doing a Bang-Up Job Of Helping Gays Get Rights

Apparently, these "real" christians are a teeny, tiny minority of all christendom, because it's a rare fucking day indeed when we hear a peep from them in favor of gay equality.

[krabigirl]

9. we can only dream...jk

[TokenQueer]

10. Eradicate their beliefs? If only...

:banghead:

[ingac70]

11. murdering people are their beliefs?

then they need to be eradicated.

[virgogal]

12. It's one wacked out Christian group,not Christians in general. rawstory

should be ashamed of itself.

[TokenQueer]

15. Christians should be ashamed, not rawstory.

Reign in your own crazies...

[MineralMan]

18. Please direct me to links where you have publicly repudiated

any Christian organization. I'll also accept links where other Christian leaders have done that.

I accept people's own declarations of Christianity. If they say they're Christians, then who am I to argue?

[TrogL]

20. To call oneself "Christian" one must follow certain rules

http://members.shaw.ca/trogl

You need to have a certain set of beliefs, usually summed up in at least one, preferably all three Creeds.

If you have a major variance, you need to publish an Apologia, justifying your differences.

You need to position yourself in the various major controverises:

Works vs. Faith

Which Books are Canon

preferred translation and/or what to do about translation issues

Inerrancy of the Bible

Mary

Trinity

The Nature of the Host

Resurrection

Transfiguration

Paul's homophobia, sexism, racism etc. etc. etc. etc.

Synoptic Gospels vs. John

If you profess these rules, then do the exact opposite, you have a lot of 'splainin' to do.

[MineralMan]

21. Nope. All that is required is that you state that you are a

Christian. Even Jesus said that, if you are to believe that what is recorded in the Gospels represents the words of Jesus.

The rest is dogma. If you tell me, a non-Christian, that you are a Christian, I will accept your word on that subject. I can discuss the doctrines of various denominations with you all day long, if you like, but the bottom line is that all those who claim Christianity are Christian. I leave it to Christians to disavow people they do not believe represent Christianity. If they do not, then what am I to think but that they accept them as Christians?

BTW, you left out transubstantiation and predestination in your list, just as a couple of examples. There are many more doctrinal issues you ommitted.

[TrogL]

24. Yeah, I figured I missed a few

I was lumping transsubtantiation in with "nature of the Host", and I haven't the slightest clue about predestination.

But lacking a solid definition of "Christian", it's become just a meaningless buzzword at best.

Unless I'm being dogmatic (pun intended), I call myself a "follower of Christ", in a (probably useless) attempt to make the distinction.

My specific denomination is Anglo-Catholic. Last summer somebody kept leaving increasingly nasty pamphlets on our windshields saying we were all going to hell and exhorting us to become "Christian".

We don't even have a clear record of exactly what Christ said. There's two conflicting versions of what happened at the fig tree, and Him cursing it seems out of character.

[MineralMan]

27. Whatever. You say you're Christian...you're Christian.

Same for the Suthrun Babtist racists. It's all one thing. When I start seeing Christian leaders disavowing the wackos publicly, then I may listen. Until then, it's all one thing, as far as I'm concerned.

Want some fun? Go ask a Lutheran minister about Luther's opinion of Jews. It's a hoot.

[defendandprotect]

33. You mean Christian churches have never taught "hatred" nor "intolerance" from their pulpits???

hmmm....

Seems to me they're still at it --

women, homosexuals, people of color -- people of other religions!



And, maybe the Bible is something other than "Christian"???

[Toasterlad]

45. Really? See, I'd Think YOU'D Be Ashamed To Share a Faith With Such Hateful People

[MineralMan]

13. Wait...what? Hate is a Christian belief? Who knew?

Has anyone asked Jebus?

[RedCloud]

16. You mean the Inquisition wasn't a game show? Baghdad got lit up like a Christmas tree?

Inscriptions on bombs and guns?
Genocide?
Apartheid?

[MineralMan]

17. Well, when you think about it, there was Sodom and Gomorrah.

And the Great Flood. And Jericho. I guess the Christian deity is a tough guy, after all, with lots of anger stuff going on. No, thanks, very much. There must be a nice deity somewhere...you know, one that doesn't want virgins thrown down volcanos and so on.

Maybe not. I think I'll pass on that deity stuff. Buncha angry old white guys, I think.

[TokenQueer]

19. Christians always omit the grand finale of 'Sodom and Gomorrah'...

...you know, the part where Lot fucks and impregnates his daughters.

Hmmmmm... I wonder why that is?

[MineralMan]

22. Well, it got included in the canon, so they didn't really

omit it. It's a bit of a sticky wicket, though, isn't it. First, Lot's wife disobeys the demands of the deity, so it kills her and turns her to a pillar of salt. Then, Lot's daughters got Dad drunk and boinked him. Turns out the ones the deity let live weren't all that much better than the ones it wasted.

That God guy...what a comedian. I suppose he just said Oops! and carried on.

Incidentally, you'll be interested in what happened to Lot's incestuous offspring. Things did not work out well for them, in the end.

Still, Christians aren't noted for their knowledge of the Old Testament. Too much awkward stuff in there. Oh, it's very nice and all that, but Paul has the real stuff.

[TokenQueer]

23. "...Christians aren't noted for their knowledge..."

'Nuff said.

:D

[MineralMan]

25. Actually, there are quite a few Christians who have good

knowledge of the Bible. You won't find them amongst the haters, though, in general. They're very interesting to talk to, assuming that you have enough background.

I've been discussing this stuff with such people since I was 16 years old, and that was a very, very long time ago. Fascinating stuff.

Lot and his daughters' stories don't end at the point where they get drunk and crazy. There's lots more to it. Old Jaweh sorta blew it with that Sodom and Gomorrah thing, you see. But...did he admit it? Nope. He just damned the result and caused problems for those Jews down the road later.

It's fascinating stuff. Sometimes it seems like God was just winging it and going with the flow. I can see it now: "Man...that didn't work out like I though it would. Hmm...oh, well. Time to punt."

[TokenQueer]

28. TokenQueer yields the remainder of his time to Mineral Man.

*tag-in*

:fistbump:

[notadmblnd]

29. Let me guess, this is on the western side of the State.

am I wrong?

[struggle4progress]

30. Public Law 111–84 | Oct. 28, 2009 | 123 Stat. 2835 - 2844

It's Division E of the NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 and can be cited as ‘‘Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act’’

Googling "Public Law No. 111-84" will produce the Thomas link
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/L?d111:./list/bd/d111pn.lst:35<35-49>(Public_Laws:_Senate_Bills)|TOM:/bss/d111query.html|
from which a pdf can be downloaded

Searching the pdf for "hate" several times will rapidly locate Division E of the statute

It's worth a look. None of the wingnut huff-n-puff is justified. The statute contains language like the following:

... Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person—
(i) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and
(ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both,
if—
(I) death results from the offense; or
(II) the offense includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill ...

It's difficult to portray that as an attack on anyone's religious or free speech rights, especially since the statute also contains language like the following:

... (4) FREE EXPRESSION.—Nothing in this division shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual’s expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs or solely upon an individual’s membership in a group advocating or espousing such beliefs.
(5) FIRST AMENDMENT.—Nothing in this division, or an amendment made by this division, shall be construed to diminish any rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(6) CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.—Nothing in this division shall be construed to prohibit any constitutionally protected speech, expressive conduct or activities (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), including the exercise of religion protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and peaceful picketing or demonstration. The Constitution of the United States does not protect speech, conduct or activities consisting of planning for, conspiring to commit, or committing an act of violence ...

The natural conclusion will be either (1) the American Family Association of Michigan and the Thomas More Law Center have filed a lawsuit without reading the law they are challenging, or (2) the American Family Association of Michigan and the Thomas More Law Center have filed a frivolous lawsuit for purposes of gaining attention and raising funds, or (3) the American Family Association of Michigan and the Thomas More Law Center believe that the Constitution of the United States DOES protect speech, conduct or activities consisting of planning for, conspiring to commit, or committing an act of violence and further believe that they have a religious right to cause or attempt to cause bodily injury by use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device on grounds of actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability

While I hope the Courts view the suit as case (2) above, I think that case (3) is the proper interpretation of the suit in public discussion. In seeking prompt dismissal, the Justice Department should of course argue case (1).

[defendandprotect]

31. Yes -- Let's "eradicate" hatred and intolerance in male-supremacist religious teachings!!!

[JerseygirlCT]

32. Well, if they consider torture and murder their beliefs

then I suppose they have a point. Or something.

[muffin1]

34. It's been a long, long time since I've cracked open a bible,

so I need a little help here. Where exactly are the passages that promote hating and/or killing those with whom one disagrees? I've searched high and low, but to no avail. Since today is Sunday, maybe some christians here will ask their leaders about this while they're at church, and then report back here later...

[Touchdown]

42. They're between the passage where

A talking snake convinces a woman to eat a piece of fruit, and punishes all women henceforth for that, and ends with Jesus throwing all non-raptured/non-bleivers/un-converted Jews into the lake of fire. The hatred passage is basically page 8 to page 1048, give or take the font size.

[mrs_p]

36. is it their belief to kill a kid in cold blood?

then, yes. eradicate away.

[TexasObserver]

38. Recommend

[BlueIdaho]

39. Sick Fucks.

I live near the old Aryan Nations world headquarters - I've seen all this before - these folks are no better than your garden variety bible thumping white supremacists.

[Mari333]

40. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE LIONS?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orTqqL4C0ok


AND JESUS WILL KICK YOUR ASS

[Touchdown]

43. Iron Man Jesus!!!!

:rofl: