| |
Rare Jewel
Insight:
July 7, 2004
Table of Contents:
- COMMENTARY
"Inside the "Hate Crimes" Amendment"
- TAKE ACTION
We Can Stop the "Hate Crimes" Amendment
Pledge Case follow-up
1. COMMENTARY
Inside the
"Hate Crimes"' Amendment
(by Tim Ewing, Publisher, Rare Jewel
Magazine)
On June 15th, 2004, with a 65-33 vote,
the U.S. Senate added a "hate crimes" amendment
to the $447 billion defense spending bill for next
year. Officially known as the Local Law Enforcement
Act, every Democratic Senator (except Senator John
Kerry who wasn't present--as has been the case in
88 percent of the Senate votes this year) was joined
by 18 Republicans. Many in the Christian community
immediately decried this outcome.
Following are the highlights:
1. We oppose this amendment because it may lead to
outlawing Christian doctrine that calls homosexuality
sinful and unnatural:
Throughout the debate amendment co-sponsors Senator
Gordon Smith (R-OR) and Ted Kennedy (D-MA) repeatedly
made reference that this amendment would not punish
thought or speech. In Senator Smith's words, "Many
of my colleagues will ask, 'Why are you trying to
punish thought?' I think it is important to recount
that we are not punishing thought. We are not punishing
speech. We are, in fact, punishing thought and speech
that amounts to conduct, and that conduct then becomes
criminal."
While adamantly trying to position this legislation
as punishing criminal conduct and not thought or speech,
Senators Smith and Kennedy (and by association the
other 63 Senators who voted with them) have tipped
their hand about how they really view thought and
speech that is contrary to the homosexual lifestyle.
During the floor debate these Senators noted that
any thought or speech that was against the homosexual
lifestyle was "hateful." Their comments
were always in the context that the amendment would
not punish such thought or speech, but nonetheless
we find it alarming that they were all the time referring
to any such thought and speech in terms such as "hateful."
Though this legislation doesn't specifically call
for outlawing Biblical teaching against the homosexual
lifestyle, it does imply that such teaching is "hate
speech" and in today's age of judicial supremacy
this amendment could lay the groundwork for an activist
judge to ban certain portions of the Bible and muzzle
our pastors and citizens.
2. We oppose this amendment because it constitutes
yet another federal reach for power at the expense
of our states, especially when there is no evidence
the states actually need federal involvement (in contrast
to the situation a few decades ago when many Southern
states failed to enforce law to protect African Americans).
Prosecution for crimes covered by the amendment has
historically been a state power. Senator Jeff Sessions
(R-AL) noted, "I think before we continue down
this road of moving into the psychological motivations
for a specific act of committing a crime, we ought
to ask ourselves: is it the kind of problem we know
is not being effectively prosecuted and handled in
America today, is not being prosecuted and sentenced
effectively based on the act that was committed, so
that now we need to figure out the motive behind the
act and make it a Federal crime?" He added, "I
am not aware of those offenses being inadequately
prosecuted."
Our Federal Government has grown far beyond its role
as originally intended by our Founding Fathers. Citizens
need to let our representatives know that we want
our government to return to its intended form, to
dramatically reduce its size and scope. There is no
need for the Federal Government to add yet another
layer of bureaucracy in the form of this amendment.
This is simply a political maneuver designed to win
votes in the next election, a maneuver that will cost
the taxpayer without providing any real benefit.
3. We oppose this amendment because it continues the
trend of inaccurately acknowledging homosexuals as
a particular "class" of people in the same
vein as someone's race or gender, therefore attempting
to position homosexuals with these groups that need
legal protection from "discrimination."
There is no evidence that points to sexual preference
as an innate characteristic such as one's race or
gender (for more on this, be sure to read the July/August
issue of Rare Jewel Magazine, which will ship later
this month).
4. We oppose this amendment because it advances the
notion that homosexuality should be embraced (and
even promoted) as acceptable by our culture.
Homosexuality is NOT harmless. In fact, research clearly
shows that homosexuality brings with it serious threats
to the physical, mental, and emotional health of those
involved and by extension our society as a whole (read
the July/August issue of Rare Jewel Magazine for more
information on this).
Our government should not be engaged in promoting
a lifestyle that has serious negative consequences
for society.
5. We oppose this amendment because it communicates
the wrong values to our society.
During the debate over the amendment Senator Smith
stated, "The law is a teacher." In this,
he is correct. If our Congress passes a law that communicates
to our culture, to our children, that homosexuality
is such an important value that it needs special protection
under law we are sending a signal loud and clear that
homosexuality should be considered normal and even
actively embraced and promoted.
Our Founding Fathers based our country's laws on Biblical
principles. That's why activities such as adultery
and homosexuality were outlawed for much of our nation's
history. Our Founders understood that if a nation
follows God's ways, it will prosper…and likewise
if a nation rejects God's ways it will degrade and
even disappear. This amendment sends a signal to our
culture that it is okay to violate God's way which
is an unhealthy proposition for our nation in the
long run.
We desire to proclaim a message of hope, grace, and
love to homosexuals and encourage them to embrace
the truth. We oppose the "hate crimes" legislation
not because we oppose homosexuals, but because we
oppose both the subtle and overt methods that activists
in our culture are using to foster myths about homosexuality.
Current Status:
Eight days after the hate crimes amendment passed,
the U.S. Senate voted 97-0 to approve the 2005 defense
spending bill (S.2400) which included the hate crimes
amendment.
However, it's not too late to stop the "hate
crimes" amendment from becoming law. Designated
conferees from the Senate and the House will conference
this month to finalize wording for the bill--a process
that includes adding and eliminating various items
in the bill. See TAKE ACTION below for more information.
To see how your Senators voted on the "hate crimes"
amendment, go to:
http://capwiz.com
To read the amendment, go to:
http://www.congress.gov
(from this page, scroll down until you find the heading,
"SA 3183.")
Top of this
Article
Top of this
Page
2.
TAKE ACTION
We
Can Stop the "Hate Crimes" Amendment
Twice since 1999 a "hate crimes" amendment
has been piggy-backed to a bill which was later approved
by the U.S. Senate. Both times the amendment was stripped
out "in conference." A bill must pass both
the House and Senate in the same form before it can
be presented to the President for signature into law.
Once the larger bodies agree on the contents of their
respective versions of a bill, they will often appoint
a conference committee with both House and Senate
members to iron out the differences between the two
versions. One major difference between the Senate
and House versions of the 2005 defense bill is that
the House version does not include the "hate
crimes" amendment.
Below is a list of the Senators who have been appointed
to conference on the defense bill. ("nay"
means they voted against the "hate crimes"
amendment, "yea" means they voted in favor).
Ten of the twenty-five Senator-conferees voted against
the "hate crimes" amendment.
Allard (R-CO, nay); Chambliss (R-GA, nay); Collins
(R-ME, yea); Cornyn (R-TX, nay); Dole (R-NC, nay);
Ensign (R-NV, yea); Graham (R-SC, nay); Inhofe (R-OK,
nay); McCain (R-AZ, nay); Roberts (R-KS, nay); Sessions
(R-AL, nay); Talent (R-MO, nay); Warner (R-VA, yea);
Akaka (D-HI, yea); Bayh (D-IN, yea); Byrd (D-WV, yea);
Clinton (D-NY, yea); Dayton (D-MN, yea); Kennedy (D-MA,
yea); Levin (D-MI, yea); Lieberman (D-CT, ); Nelson
(D-FL, yea); Nelson (D-NE, yea); Pryor (D-AR, yea);
Reed (D-RI, yea).
The House has yet to appoint their conferees (we'll
let you know as soon as they do) and the entire committee
is expected to hammer out the final bill later this
month.
In terms of political pressure, opposing this defense
spending bill because of the "hate crimes"
amendment would bring a huge amount of grief on any
Senator who would choose such a course. The peer pressure
to approve the defense bill is tremendous, as evidenced
by the fact that all 33 Republican Senators who voted
against the "hate crimes" amendment still
approved the overall defense bill even though it contained
the amendment they voted against.
If this bill makes it to President Bush, he will be
under the same political pressure (if not more) to
sign this bill into law. But we elect our officials
to be leaders, and we expect them to lead and do the
right thing even when the political heat gets fierce.
If we will make our voices heard we can still affect
the outcome of this amendment. After all, this amendment
has been stripped out in committee before--twice!
Call or email your senator once every week in July
and ask them to do everything in their power to strip
out this amendment--especially if they are one of
the twenty-five conferees. There is a fantastic tool
on the Web to help you email your senator with the
greatest of ease (and also obtain their phone number),
go to: http://capwiz.com/afanet/dbq/officials/
Pledge
Case follow-up
Many Rare Jewel Insight readers responded to our recent
Special Report about the Supreme Court ruling on the
Pledge of Allegiance case--asking for contact information
so we can make our voices be heard (see: http://www.rarejewelmag.com/articles
for the Special Report).
* For an excellent online tool that makes emailing
our elected officials super easy (and also find telephone
and postal address details), go to: http://capwiz.com/afanet/dbq/officials/
Note: Due to heightened security measures, we do not
recommend you do any postal mail communication with
your elected representatives. Email and phone calls
are much more efficient.
* To contact Supreme Court, you may call (202) 479-3211
but they do not take any comments or complaints. The
only way to get a personal message to a Supreme Court
Justice is by mail to:
[Insert name of Justice]
1 First St NE
Washington, DC 20513
The Justices do not circulate correspondence, so you
must mail nine individual letters if you wish to communicate
with all nine Justices.
* My good friend Reverend Rob Schenck of Faith and
Action (Missionaries to Capitol Hill) also passes
along this advice:
"So, what are we to do? The same thing our President
led the nation in doing after 9-11. We need to Pray,
Plan and Act. Here's what we at Faith and Action will
do on each of these points:
1) Pray:
- That God will frustrate those who
want America to shake a fist in His face and declare
themselves in rebellion against His will and purposes
for this country.
- That God's people will rise up courageously
in prophetic witness to do their part in preserving
the blessings of Liberty by acknowledging His sovereignty
over the Land and defending this rich American heritage.
2) Plan:
- To use every means available to us
as citizens of the United States to preserve and
protect the acknowledgement of God over our Land.
- Appeal to our elected and appointed
officials to stand courageously against those bent
on purging the acknowledgement of God from the American
landscape.
- Urge the leaders of both political
parties to act immediately to adopt platforms that
support the acknowledgement of God.- Require our
Congressional leaders and members to support legislation--and
a constitutional amendment, if necessary--to preserve
and protect our great heritage of acknowledging
God.
3) Act:
- By informing others of an inevitable
second assault on the Pledge of Allegiance, and
the consequent assault on every public acknowledgement
of God that is sure to come in its wake.
- Organize our families, communities
and churches to act BEFORE this second assault comes.
- Sign the FAITH AND ACTION petition
to urge the two political parties to adopt platform
statements supporting the public acknowledgement
of God." Sign the petition at:
http://www.grassfire.net/44/petition.asp
Top of this
Article
Top of this
Page
|
|
