H.R. 1913

[Mary Lundin]

I strongly urge a NO vote on this bill:
1) I ask you to vote against H.R. 1913 - the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Because of pressure from homosexual groups, Congress has refused to define what is meant by sexual orientation in H.R. 1913. By doing so, this means that the 30 different sexual orientations will be federally protected classes.
2) Laws already exist in all 50 states to punish violent crime, making H.R. 1913 unnecessary, unfair, indefinable, un-American and constitutionally suspect. H.R. 1913 is not designed to aid in crime fighting. Instead, punishing wrong beliefs about homosexuality is its sole purpose.
3) H.R. 1913 is one more step in the campaign to legitimize homosexuality in our culture by treating it as a protected class along with race, gender, and religion.

[Carl Collicott]

This particular Legislation is merely an amendment to the Washington D.C Municipal Code. Legislation for D.C is always styled as being held at the City of Washington. Always remember that Congress legislates for the City of D.C. This legislation does not apply in the several states of the Union.
Pasted below is the genesis for title 18 248, H.R 1913 is an addition to Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994'.


TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 248

Amendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–322, § 330023(a)(2), amended section catchline generally. Prior to amendment, catchline read as follows: “§ 248 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances.”


One Hundred Third Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four
An Act
To amend title 18, United States Code, to assure freedom of access to reproductive
services.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994'.

[Scott Knapp]

I am hopeful that Congressman Rohrabacher voted against this bill for political reasons and that, now that it has passed, he will learn how positive and productive the legislation is in preventing hate crimes.

[Mary Lundin]

Thank you Dana Rohrabacher for standing up against this bill.

[Scott Knapp]

I'm sorry if my comments "don't make any sense". I will work towards being as clear and simple as I can. I have no interest in your or Perez Hilton's sympathy, nor does your opinion of my "kind" of morality have any value to me. You started a blog to make your opinion known and to encourage support from OUR elected representative. I am challenging that. Now, let us review point one and you can tell me where the "circles" are and what doesn't make sense.
Mary: It doesn't matter for what reason someone beats someone to death. That in itself is a crime and punishable by the law
Scott: Of course it does! If you are beating my child to death because you don't like the color of her eyes and I shoot you dead, the REASON matters.

[Mary Lundin]

You know what? You don't make any sense and you're talking in circles. You don't even want to acknowledge your own statements. So, please go to Perez Hilton's website and blog there. I'm sure he will have a lot more sympathy for your kind of morality.

[Scott Knapp]

Just out of curiousity; how do you know those friends of yours are gay? Indeed, how does one share that information without "shoving it down your throat"?

[Scott Knapp]

1-Of course it does! If you are beating my child to death because you don't like the color of her eyes and I shoot you dead, the REASON matters.
2-Tell me how prosecuting a hate crime against any minority will have a ramification beyond stopping hate crimes.
3-I am standing up for morality, too. Clearly, we have different morals. Tell me how my challenging your misguided idea about hate crimes is "turning the tables" and making you bad?

[Mary Lundin]

1- It doesn't matter for what reason someone beats someone to death. That in itself is a crime and punishable by the law. 2- You completely miss the point, passage of this law would have ramifications way beyond hate crimes
3- So, keep it a part of YOUR culture. Stop trying to force in on everyone else. I have several homosexual friends but they don't try and ram their lifestyle choices down my throat. Just because I have a different opinion than you on the legal issues in this matter doesn't mean I don't like anyone. Stop turning the tables and making those who want to stand up for morality the bad guy. Stop pushing your agenda on the loving and caring majority of this Great Nation.

[Scott Knapp]

1-Should there be any class (sexually or otherwise-for the sake of this discussion-let's say brown eyed people) that should not be federally protected from hate crimes? If I beat you to death because you have brown eyes is it not different than if I beat you to death because you stole my car?
2-I disagree. If I assault you because I am starving and you are carrying a loaf of bread, I will be punished. If I assault you because your eyes are brown, I will be punished as well. Same crime?
3-With or without your approval, homosexuality is a legitimate part of my culture. This legislation is about protecting against HATE crimes. If you don't like homosexuals and you don't want to be a part of that culture, you don't have to, but you can't physically hurt them or allow them to be hurt because you don't like them and then call yourself an American.