Thursday, May 3, 2007

THREAT OF A VETO TO PRESERVE ALL CONSERVATIVES RIGHTS TO HATE AND ACT UPON THEIR HATRED OF GAYS

President threatens another veto, this time over a bill which would add protection against hate crimes, allowing federal law enforcement to take part in, or assist local prosecutions with bias motivated attacks.
The bill, which is speeding through the senate, and has already passed the House with a vote of 237 to 180, merely adds additional protection and help in enforcing prosecution involving perpetrators of bias based hate crimes. And who in their right minds are actually in favor of violent acts against homosexuals?
You guessed it, the Bush administration, and the ultra-conservatives. The administration's official stance is that there is "no persuasive demonstration of any need to federalize such a potentially large range of violent crime enforcement." The conservative watch dog groups are all over this one in opposition, largely because they "are afraid the added protection under the law will hamper their demonstrations in opposition to homosexuality." And, of course this logic is completely understandable, because what is a demonstration against gays without random acts of violence which constitute hate crimes.
In other news, the administration is looking into the sexuality of the victims at Virginia Tech before officially declaring their opposition / support of the carnage there some two weeks ago. Same logic. Same incredible hubris.
Hate crimes under current federal law apply to acts of violence against individuals on the basis of race, religion, color, or national origin. Federal prosecutors have jurisdiction only if the victim is engaged in a specific federally protected activity such as voting.
The House bill would extend the hate crimes category to include sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability and give federal authorities greater leeway to participate in hate crimes investigations. It approves $10 million over the next two years to help local law enforcement officials cover the cost of hate crimes prosecutions.
So let's see...two proposed veto's in six years. One to prolong a war, and one to lessen the ability of law enforcement to prosecute criminals who commit hate crimes of groups for their sex, or sexual orientation.
I have never, ever been so proud to be a member of the Democratic party. For all of our faults, and we have many, we are the ones consistently against bias and bigotry. We are the ones who reach down to give a helping hand up. We are the party that actually follows their religious beliefs by treating everyone fairly, rather than picking groups of people to hate, and wield their power against. We are the party of the people, all of the people. Ask Barney Frank, who was never so proud as to be able to preside over the House as they overwhelmingly passed the bill.
No reports yet from other members of the Republican party, namely Mark Foley and the Vice Presidents daughter, two of their own who must be proud as punch today at the prospect with the further enabling of violent acts, in Iraq, and on our own soil. Kind of makes you wonder who is next, doesn't it?

1 comment:

Papa Giorgio said...

Kimba,

Why do we need different laws for a group of people than others? The two men – for instance – that killed Matthew Sheppard got life in prison without “special laws.” I don’t want “Heterosexual” hate crimes, because we already have enough laws on the books to prosecute crimes done by gay, or straight men and women. I suggest you read the entire Wikipedia example that throws a “monkey wrench” into your… “ooooh, I am sooo proud to be a Democrat…” bit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Dirkhising

.

.