I am not sure exactly why we continue to read that the new hate crimes legislation will result in pastors being jailed for preaching their biblical views on homosexuality. It seems that the entire Christian right is united in promulgating this falsehood. When people argue against something based on manufactured points, that suggests an agenda that they are unwilling to disclose. In this case, the facts are so obvious that the "debate" has become remarkable for its disingenuous attack from the religious right.

H.R. 1913 – "To provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for other purposes". – is limited to violent crime. Furthermore, it contains the following:

"Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses of, the First Amendment to the Constitution."

Another theory goes something like this: United States Code Title 18, Section 2, is evidence of how the legislation could be used against people who merely speak out against homosexuality. It states:Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. Thus, a Christian pastor or other teacher could be tried for openly speaking out against homosexuality if someone misconstrues their message as encouragement to commit a violent crime against another person – even if the Christian leader never advocated the offense.

False

Intent or knowledge is a Key factor In third-party responsibility for crimes (aiding and abetting - USC 18:2).

Conviction in such cases typically requires intent or knowledge of the ensuing criminal actions. Indeed, it would constitute a violation of  the First Amendment if speakers or publishers could unwittingly cause crimes for which they then could be held responsible. HR1913 includes specific First Amendment applicability.

Federal criminal law creates a general "aiding and abetting" offense for those who "provide knowing aid to persons committing federal crimes, with the intent to facilitate the crime." Importantly, the aider and abettor's state of mind must be "knowing" and "intent[ional]"; recklessness alone is not enough. The question is exactly when the First Amendment does, and does not, prohibit prosecution under the statute.

This nitwit has only one idea; Gay is bad - I mean really, really bad!

In an article today that appears on AFA's OneNewsNow titled: Homosexuality & the laws of moral physics, Barber shares with us:

Again, it's fundamental. Homosexual behavior, like adultery, fornication, incest and bestiality is, under no uncertain terms, classified as sexual immorality in both the Old and New Testaments. The historical and biblical records are unequivocal. In order to reach a contrary conclusion, people like President Obama, who rationalize that the Bible somehow affirms homosexual behavior -- or at least remains neutral on the subject -- are forced to cast aside any pretense of intellectual honesty and engage in gold-medal mental gymnastics.
 
So, for the sake of national unity, let's clear up any confusion about marriage and sexual immorality once and for all, shall we? And afterward, I expect all you leftists who've been badmouthing us "fundamentalists" to apologize, 'kay?
 
First of all it was God, not Jerry Falwell, who both created and defined the institution of marriage.

I confess that I do not know what "moral physics" is nor was I aware that it had laws. Once again, Matt groups sexual orientation with bestiality and incest so Hart's Corollary prevails.

Barber goes on to espouse the proforma ignorance:

Despite fairly successful attempts by self-described "gay" activists to equate behaviorally driven "gayness" to immutable and neutrally defined qualities such as race and gender, the reality is that being "gay" has absolutely nothing to do with what someone is, and has everything to do with what someone does.

There is a segment of our society that considers stupidity a virtue.

In contrast, people who are smart, well educated or accomplished are “elites.” This construction serves to excuse those who worship imbecility. Exhibit "A" is Joe Da Plumber. Among those idolaters is surely J. Matt Barber who would have us disregard the body of evidence supplied by published and peer reviewed science in order to support a position based upon his interpretation of scripture.

I am surprised that he did not go off on his "there is no gay gene" rant. Of course, there is no race gene either. What is coming down the pike from the religious right is the acceptance that sexual orientation is, indeed, biological in origin but "it's all about behavior." Should gays be "hornier than though?" Then we'll be asked to endure comparisons to incest and pedophilia without considering that those are not lawful activities by consenting adults.

However, what is most offensive about all of this is that it is in the context of civil law. This is not exactly what our deist founding fathers had in mind. Ultimately, people need to understand that the religious right wants to control far more than just who we can marry. They would like to control what we can read; what TV shows we can watch; what music we can listen to and what movies we can watch. There is, indeed, a very fine line between the Iranian theocracy and the imposition of the Barber crowd's idea of morality.  The oppression of a minority due to the fact that they were born with different sexuality is immoral. Moreover, it represents a simplistic expression of prejudice and bigotry born of ignorance.

 

The Gay Libertarian asserts that discrimination has no place in conservative thinking. Mr. Conservative, Barry Goldwater was pro-choice and a proponent of gay rights.

Writing in AFA’s OneNewsNow, J. Matt Barber displays the full breadth and depth of his paranoia and neuroses.

“… Barack Obama is promoting counter-biblical, anti-Christian policies,” he contends. “[These are] policies that elevate deviant sexual behaviors and dangerous sexual behaviors that are destructive spiritually, physically and emotionally, and certainly – when embraced as Barack Obama has embraced them – are destructive societally.”

Barber adds that “for all the talk of hope, change and coming together, it’s becoming abundantly clear that Barack Obama’s administration will be the most leftist, divisive, and discriminatory in recent memory.”

It is astonishing – if not spectacularly moronic – for Barber to label anyone else as “divisive and discriminatory.” Ever since this nitwit was canned by Allstate for using corporate resources and writing his screeds on company time, he has devoted his time, 24x7 to the disparagement of gay people. This guy needs a new hobby.

Comment at: http://www.tips-q.com/content/matt-bam-bam-barber-hones-his-personality-disorder

 

The justice Department is in shambles. The offices are filled with “lawyers” who attended madrassas like Liberty U. and Regent School of Law. Who needs those “elites” out of Harvard and Yale? For all intents and purposes, the Civil Rights Division is nonexistent. Many of our best and brightest were either forced out by the Politburo or were so demoralized that they quit. This is where torture was justified while the Geneva Conventions were invalidated. Mr. Holder has a challenge ahead of him to put it mildly.

With all that going on, Focus on the Family is obsessed with porn. Porn.

But apparently the Republicans on the committee — Sens. Specter, Orrin Hatch, Charles Grassley, Jon Kyl, Jeff Sessions, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn, Sam Brownback and Tom Coburn — refused to ask questions on these topics.

“It is shameful that pro-family Republicans refused to question Holder on his future enforcement of federal adult-obscenity laws,” said Ashley Horne, federal policy analyst at Focus on the Family Action. “Especially when the last three attorneys general have done nothing to enforce the law and help protect families.”

When it comes to porn, I have a simple solution. If your don’t like it — don’t view it. The real issue is that groups like Focus on the Family want to substitute their judgment for mine and yours. So-called Christian movie critic, Ted Baehr, warns audiences of excessive male torso exposure. Shall that be the standard of what is obscene? How about the puritans over at Parents Television Council? They think that CSI: Crime Scene Investigation is indecent. They would limit our viewership to blather like Touched by and Angel and they are petrified by gay TV characters.

When they are not gay bashing, groups like Focus on the Family, American Family Association, Family Research Council and Vision America have a different mission. Their objective is to transform America into a theocracy. They will decide what books we can read; what television shows we can watch; what movies we can see; what web sites we can visit and what magazines we can subscribe to.

Thanks but no thanks.

Comment to: http://www.tips-q.com/content/focus-porn

Kathleen is right on most counts. If the GOP is ever to get my vote again then it needs to get out of the God business. Indeed, the religious right is antithetical to libertarian ideas. Many are dominionists who wish to control what books you read, what movies you see and what television programs you watch; Ultimately how and what you think. Moreover, they seem to be obsessed with who I have sex with. The GOP does not need to support or encourage the Morality Police.  Furthermore, it seems somewhat arduous to craft long term policies in concert with end-of-world,  rapture ready fetishists.

Where I disagree with Kathleen Parker is her assertion that the GOP has concluded "But we need the votes." It's not the lever pullers that the GOP is addicted to; It is the foot soldiers. The religious right have "faithfully" become the envelope stuffers, bell ringers, and telephone callers.

In return for the mighty army, the GOP must support religious policies - some of which are illogical if not constitutionally offensive if one embraces the "Establishment Clause." The Bush administration has probably set back stem cell research a decade in order to protect some microscopic goo that the fundamentalists have declared is human life. If we want to maintain our stature as the most techincally advanced nation in the world (at least I hope that we still are) then we need to stop entertaining the embarassment of dumbing down our kids with Intelligent Design. What is most galling about ID is the attempt (with GOP cooperation) to pass it off as something other than Creationism. Furthermore, if we really want to decrease teen pregnancies then it seems essential acknowledge - politically - that "abtincence only" is non-secular hogwash.

The religious right are brilliant with semantics. Those who favor reproductive choice are pro-abortion. Anti-gay is pro-marriage and so on. Nobody likes abortion. However, if I had a pregnant teen daughter, we would not want the government to eliminate one of our options because it owes something to the religious right.

What should scare the heck out of fiscal conservatives and Republicans is that they have lost the support of younger voters in spectacular fashion. Thus, the map of the bible belt that now represents the "red zone" is going to continue to shrink.

The only solution to declining returns is to get back to secular government that our founding fathers really had in mind. The choice is simple; Get out of the God business or go out of business entirely.