I Thought Orrin Hatch Was A Conservative?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by KenH, Nov 14, 2003.

  1. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some good points by Neal Boortz:

    FEDERAL "HATE CRIMES" LEGISLATION IS ON THE WAY

    Now we have Republican Senator Orin Hatch joining with Teddy Kennedy in pushing yet another version of a federal hate crimes bill. This bill would allow federal prosecution for any crime motivated by prejudice based things like race, ethnicity and religion, but also on gender, sexual orientation or disability of the victim.

    Come on, folks. Let's call this what it is. It's "thought crimes" legislation, not "hate crimes." It allows for the federal government to step in and prosecute someone for what they were thinking when they committed a crime. Let's say this crime became law. A white person commits a crime against a black person. The white person is prosecuted in a state court and is acquitted by a jury. Civil rights warlords would then be in a position to pressure the local federal prosecutor to bring a federal hate crimes charge against the white person. The federal government could then step in and prosecute the white person not for what that person did to his victim, but because of what that person may have been thinking when he did it.

    There was a trial in Atlanta recently of a group of particularly noxious young whites who attacked a group of blacks in an area known as Little Five Points. The whites were yelling racial epithets. These whites were convicted and sentenced to jail. Some local race warlords immediately started screaming to high heaven because these idiot kids didn't receive 20-year sentences. If this federal law were in place the race warlords would be able to pressure the feds to bring the federal hate crimes charges to bear. Maybe they could get their precious 20-year sentences after all.

    Another scenario. I'm waking down the street with a black friend. A gang of white skinheads comes up and pounds the stew out of both of us. The skinheads are charged with assault, tried, convicted and sentenced to jail. Then along comes the federal government to file hate crime charges against the skinheads. They are going to be charged with an extra crime because they attacked the black guy. The federal government will view the assault on my black friend as one worthy of federal prosecution ... simply because of what they feel skinheads were thinking at the time. The assault on me? Not worthy of federal attention. Tell me, is the law treating me equally in this scenario? Can you honestly say that I'm getting equal treatment?

    Hate may be ugly, but it is not illegal. In a free society you should be free to engage the negative emotion of hate as you see fit. You cannot legislate loving or liking someone. Thought processes should not be crime. Actions should be crimes. This federal hate crime bill, as all hate crime bills, is a bad idea.

    - web page
     
  2. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Hatch is one of those GOP mavericks. The key to his personality is that he is a Mormon. This causes him to be all mixed up from time to time.

    Mormons are a part of the GOP coalition. The Norman Barnacle choir performed for Bush 41 at his inauguration.

    Never be surprised at what Hatch does. Just pray that he (and all other cultists) sees the true Jesus and becomes a Christian.
     
  3. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hatch is far from a maverick. He is right in line with Bush and the rest of the party leadership. Anyone who stands for Godly constitutional government is a maverick.
     
  4. PastorGreg

    PastorGreg
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2000
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    You've got it, PA Jim. The Republican who believes in Goldy government (and the Constitution) is the rare exception these days.
     
  5. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I am not mistaken, Bush is against hate crimes legislation for the very simple and true reason that all crime is hate crime. A person killed because of prejudice is no more dead than a person killed because of money or drugs or revenge. All crimes are hate crimes and should be treated so.

    So if Hatch is for hate crimes legislation, then he is out of step with the president on this one.
     
  6. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Funny thing is, I never thought Hatch was a conservative.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
  7. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Thanks! I never counted Hatch as much of a conservative either.

    I think that we need two categories: Christian conservative and secular conservative.

    Bush's critics are in attack mode, but the election is not for another year.

    [​IMG]
     
  8. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Senator Hatch's good friend is Ted Kennedy. Need I say more? :rolleyes:
     
  9. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nonsense - quite a number of crimes are greed crimes or negligence crimes. Then there are lust crimes (pedophilia springs to mind there), pride crimes (covering lethal mistakes, perhaps) - anyway, not everything is hate.
     
  10. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nonsense - quite a number of crimes are greed crimes or negligence crimes. Then there are lust crimes (pedophilia springs to mind there), pride crimes (covering lethal mistakes, perhaps) - anyway, not everything is hate. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes it is. Hate for other humans leads to crime. The point is that whether someone kills because of prejudice or because of money, they are dead and the killer should be treated like he killed somebody. The motive is irrelevant.
     
  11. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why can't opponents be friends?

    So if a capital crime is also a hate crime, is the person given two life sentences instead of one? Given two lethal injections instead of just one?
     
  12. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hate Crimes are irrelevant in practice. The only relevance to it is to get people to slowly relinquish their freedom of thought and speech rights, to where one day we go the next step and pass hate speech legistlation and eventually, hate thoughts will be criminal. I wonder who will set the standards for hate speech. I wonder what that standard will be.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
  13. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's hard to say where Bush stands on hate crimes, as he hasn't to my knowledge had opportunity to sign or veto legislation. You sure can't go by what he says. If he is forced politically to deal with it, I would expect him to concoct some complicated unclear compromise designed to extract votes from both sides of the issue, as he did with stem cell research.

    Anyway, even if Bush would be against hate crimes legislation, it would be only one point of many...most of which he would be in line with Mr. Hatch.
     
  14. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    I am sorry, Pennsylvania, but President Dean will make you long for the good ole days of Dubya. You may want to turn you attention to what President Dean has in mind for you.

    :(
     
  15. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Like what...

    Uncontrolled spending at outrageous levels?

    Aggressive promotion of the homosexual agenda through political appointments?

    Further federalization of our childrens' education?

    Abortion on demand?

    Lying us into horrible, bloody wars against nations that do not threaten us?

    Extension of the "assault" weapons ban?

    Support of outlaw "judges" who want to purge Christianity from our public life?


    Nobody needs Dean to do all of that, Bush is doing just fine.
     
  16. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you are talking about the war against terror, then yes we are spending a lot, and it is an investment in our country to keep us from fighting the war right here in our own homeland or from experiencing another 9-11. If you are talking about the money that was sent to New York to help rebuild one of the financial centers of America and the world, are you seriously suggesting that we should let our finiancial centers go off into oblivion. If we did that, you would be bashing Bush because he was destroying our economy. If you are talking about education, I would say that you probably have a point there. But, to say that there is no difference between Bush and Dean is really rediculous.

    Aggressive promotion of the homosexual agenda through political appointments?[/QUOTE]

    There has been some promotion. I don't know if I would call it aggressive.

    Further federalization of our childrens' education?[/QUOTE]

    True. The sad truth is that come 2014, there will be some children left behind because not all kids are equal in family situations, in intelligence, and in instruction. The kids living in a white collar home don't have the same home life as those living in the ghetto (this is a generalization of course). Not everyone is a genius in math. Kids who live in the country don't get the same instruction as those in the city. There is no set curriculum. The whole push to try and make everyone equal by punishing the schools is really foolish. Got to agree with you there.

    Abortion on demand?[/QUOTE]

    http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=10;t=003338

    Lying us into horrible, bloody wars against nations that do not threaten us?[/QUOTE]

    http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=001327


    Extension of the "assault" weapons ban?[/QUOTE]

    Source?

    Support of outlaw "judges" who want to purge Christianity from our public life?[/QUOTE]

    Who are you talking about?

    Nobody needs Dean to do all of that, Bush is doing just fine. [/QUOTE]

    There are some clear differences between Bush and any of the Democrats. Otherwise, the DEMS would be tripping over themselves to join Bush because they know there isn't a single Democrat candidate who really resonates with America and they will not be ablle to fullfill their agenda. Here are the differences:

    1. Bush will cut taxes. Dems will raise them.

    2. Bush will stay the long haul in Iraq and Afganistan while the Dems will gamble our national security away on the whims of the UN who are mostly anti-American in their leanings.

    3. Bush will incrementally try to to curb abortion in America and appoint judges who will uphold a move away from the pro-death agenda in America and suppoert life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all Americans including the unborn. The Dems will START with the reversal of the ban of PBAs and then run with the ball from there the other way toward a more expanded pro-death agenda. This will not be the end, it is only the beginning.

    Bush is not perfect. But to say there are no differences between him and Dean is to stick one's head in the sand and ignore reality. I don't think even the liberal Democrats on the board would even agree with you. Otherwise, they wouldn't be fighting so hard to get him out of office. I think you are being used as unwiiting pawns in a game to give the liberal voice legitimacy by stating these inaccuracies.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
  17. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Have to agree with you, Joseph Botwinick, except for a minor point on education. There was some sort of a deal with the Senator from Chappaquiddick but he broke his word. I don't know how the farm bill became so expensive.

    Pennsylvania, has not your Hoosier friend warned you a billion times never to exaggerate?

    :D
     
  18. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sure they would. Both sides of the Demopublicans want their friends in power. It's all about power to these people, Joseph. After all, they want to be invited to the White House dinners and the other fancy dinners in Washington, D.C.

    SUPPORT CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES!
    SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION PARTY!!
     
  19. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem as I see it, Ken, is that a vote for the Constitution Party is not a vote for a conservative agenda. It would instead be a vote for the radical left pro-death machine in the Democrat Party. I think I will stick with Bush, who isn't perfect, but is not an extreme left wacko like the Democrats under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
  20. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem as I see it, Joseph, is that a vote for the Republican Party is not a vote for a conservative agenda. It would instead be a vote for the liberal, pro-big government agenda that President Bush has been carrying out during this term in office.

    It fine and dandy to be pro-life but we should also be just as concerned about the kind of USA that these babies will be born into. If we allow our nation to continue down the socialist track, these babies will have a miserable life of slavery to the government with a very low quality of life.

    Now I know as a Christian economics and liberty are not the end-all be-all but we should not ignore the ramifications of the liberal policies of President Bush and vote for him solely because he is better on the abortion issue or marginally better on the socialism issue. We want these babies we want to see born have at least as good a quality of life as we have, and hopefully even better.
     

Share This Page

Loading...