Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Gay Rights Activist Says Hate Crimes Laws are About Raising Money

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF
REFERENDUM UPDATE: We are waiting for the mandatory 5-day period in which Referendum 71 can be contested. When that is satisfied, we will begin circulating petitions. So many have indicated that they will participate that we have established a form to assist us in handling the responses. Thank you so much. Click here if you will sign or circulate petitions.

Gay Rights Activist Says Hate Crimes Laws are About Raising Money

Frankly, I was shocked when I read on Andrew Sullivan's blog that hate crimes legislation is really about raising money.

Sullivan, a well known gay activist, has a column on his website which reads; "The real reason for hate crimes laws is not the defense of human beings from crime. There are already laws against that---Matthew Shepherd's murder was successfully prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law in a state with no hate-crimes law at the time." (Article).

The column says, "The real reason for the invention of hate crimes was a hard-left critique of conventional liberal justice and the emergence of special interest groups which need boutique legislation to raise funds for their large staffs and luxurious buildings...It's a very powerful fundraising tool."

These comments are helpful in better understanding why faith based groups who work so hard with so little money are often accused of "doing it for the money" by homosexual activists.

I have no idea what goes on inside the homosexual activists organizations, however I can tell you with certainty that those who work tirelessly in faith based organizations are generally paid very modest salaries, if at all, and most often work without days off and are often publicly assaulted by those who disagree with their Judeo-Christian beliefs and stands on moral and social issues.

And are accused of doing what they do for "the money"?

Those in the faith community do what they do because of a deep abiding belief, a sense of calling and personal purpose and a recognition of a worthwhile cause, with eternal consequences.

We are always outspent by the other side, often second-guessed by some that should be on our side and sometimes vilified by public opinion. We operate on a month-to-month financial basis, do miracles with pennies and believe people of like mind will join us and God will help us.

We also expect to be successful with Referendum 71.

Evidently the faith activists and the gay rights activists live in two very different worlds.

Thank you for financially supporting us and standing with us in a worthy cause.

God bless you.

Gary Randall
Faith & Freedom

Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.

1 comment:

  1. What you aren't getting is that Andrew's flawed stance is against all hate crimes laws in general, including the existing ones that protect bias crimes against race, color, religion, or nation origin.

    Oddly, people seem to only be against modifying the federal hate crimes law, not repealing them altogether which to me speaks of motive, similar to the attempt to just prevent modification the state's Domestic Partnership law, not repeal it altogether.

    Andrew's example is poorly chosen - murder is about the only crime you don't need hate crime laws for since we already extensively subdivide it into types of homicide based on the intent of the criminal. Hate crime riders are for lesser crimes where such pedantic subdivision doesn't exist and the choices would be either have a wide sentencing range that would be open to abuse, or have an additional sentencing possible only when the 'hate crime' aspect had been proven.

    The need for a federal hate crime is to insure that there is an avenue of legal action if local authorities refuse to act. This is how its been used in the past particularly in racially motivated crimes - didn't see anyone complaining then.

    One aspect of Andrew's concern that is real is that the administration will think this is 'enough' as far as its efforts for gay Americans. I mean if I had to pick only one, I would choose repeal of the military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' over passage of hate crime legislation any day. Hate crime legislation is a firewall, DADT hurts real people right now.


Faith and Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.