Disclaimer

Some parts of this blog may contain adult-oriented material. (It is NOT porn or erotica, but some of the content is inappropriate for children). If you are under your country's legal age to view such material or find it to be "objectionable", please leave this page now. Reader discretion is advised...but if you couldn't infer from the title that this may be an adult-oriented blog, then you shouldn't be on the Internet at all.

Everything on the Evil Slutopia blog is copyrighted by the E.S.C. and ESC Forever Media and may not be used without credit to the authors. But feel free to link to us as much as you want! For other legal information, disclaimers and FAQs visit ESCForeverMedia.com.

June 22, 2009

More Conservative Lies About Hate Crimes

Some conservatives are still campaigning against the hate crimes bill that recently passed the House and is now being considered by the Senate. And they're still using lies and scare tactics to do it. Take Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute, who recently responded to some comments that Attorney General Holder made regarding the connection between the need for this legislation and the recent murders of Dr. George Tiller, a soldier at an Army recruiting station in Arkansas, and a security guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum:
"The crimes that took place have absolutely nothing to do with the content of the hate crimes bill, which only really is focusing on the special treatment and special privileges of protection to be granted to people because of their homosexuality or transsexual status," [Dacus] contends.

Dacus adds that "the bill is not about providing equal treatment -- it's providing unequal treatment," which he believes is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution.

"The hate crimes bill accomplishes nothing except to intimidate and silence legitimate, peaceful opposition to the never-ending demands of the gay and transsexual activists," he concludes.
Actually, the hate crimes bill accomplishes nothing remotely close to anything in that statement. Being that it is a hate crimes bill, you would have to commit a crime to be affected by it, and generally "legitimate, peaceful opposition" doesn't qualify. The bill also refers specifically to violent crime - it's not about bias-motivated tax fraud or anti-gay jaywalking - and it specifically excludes any "exercise of constitutionally-protected free speech" so again, any type of genuinely "peaceful opposition" would not be impacted by this bill at all. And last time I checked, committing an act of violence against someone because you have issues with their sexual orientation or gender identity was not remotely legitimate or peaceful.

I do have to agree with him on one point though - those wacky LGBT activists are really out of control, always making their outrageous demands for things like equal rights.

You really have to wonder sometimes. If people like Brad Dacus are so completely sure that they're right about bills like this one, then why can't they ever put forth a counter-argument that's based on what the bill actually says rather than on deliberate misinterpretation and misrepresentation and just outright making shit up? It's pretty hard to have any respect at all for a "legitimate opposition" that is based on nothing but fear and lies.


1 comment:

phagina said...

So, if I've got it right, this bill just provides permission for the justice dep to intervene in these cases when the mood happens to strike? Is that right? What sort of results are expected to come from this? Do the motivations behind people's committing of hate crimes really pivot around the degrees of legality? Or severity of punishments?

Or am I just confused in thinking the purpose of the bill is to prevent and reduce these crimes, rather than just helping us to 'get even' w/ the perpetrators?