"Anti-Hate" Senate Bill S.1145 threat to Christian liberty in America

blueridgewv · Oct 10, 2005

Recommend calls/faxes to oppose this
anti-constitutional, anti-Christian "hate-crime" legislation which opens Christians to Federal
government persecution for biblical preaching, speech, etc.. This bill is a
very present threat and danger to liberty in America.
------------------------------

DON'T BE HOODWINKED BY "ANTI-HATE" BILL S. 1145!

By Rev. Ted Pike
NATIONAL PRAYER NETWORK,
P. O. Box 828, Clackamas, OR 97015
truthtellers.org

As I spearhead national opposition to "anti-hate" bill S.1145
(The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005), I receive
input such as this: "I have read S.1145 and don't find any great conspiracy
against free speech." Or, "My member of Congress says S.1145 merely provides
federal assistance to state and Indian tribes in their fight against violent
hate crimes."

Here is a brief guide to understanding S.1145's hidden yet
supremely dangerous agenda.

This bill empowers the federal government to assume control of
local hate crimes law enforcement. It establishes unity between federal and
local law enforcement, thus creating the beginnings of a "police state."
This enables the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, creator of this
legislation, to enforce nationally the kind of persecution against
Christians which their national executive board member, Philadelphia
District Attorney Lynne Abraham, enforced locally against 11 Christians on
October 10, 2004. Preaching at a gay pride rally, they were arrested for
violation of ADL's Pennsylvania hate law. Possible penalties: 47 years in
prison and $90,000 fines each. Mercifully, the case against them was thrown
out by a higher court.

Lynne Abraham had unrestrained power to command her police
underlings to arrest the Philadelphia Christians. ADL wants the same federal
power to enforce its federal hate crimes agenda against Christians,
right-wing talk show hosts, critics of Israel, pro-lifers, anti-war
activists, etc., in every town in America.

Federal Takeover of Law Enforcement

Instead of telling us how S.1145 threatens our liberties, the
ADL deceptively portrays this bill as a sincere effort by the federal
government to respond to a "serious national problem:" violent hate crimes
in the states and on Indian reservations.

The real goal of S.1145 is to grant permission to the federal
government to control local civil rights law enforcement.

1. Sec.2,4-13 clearly and repeatedly states that occurrence of
bias-motivated violence in a state entitles the federal government to
override states' rights in law enforcement, establishing "federal
jurisdiction over certain violent crimes motivated by bias." (12)

2. Sec.7(b)(2)(A), strategically positioned near the end of the bill (just
when most readers and members of Congress are yawning) is a tangle of
deliberately confusing grammar and legalese terminology. Yet its
implications are deadly to the future of states' rights. It says that the
U.S. Attorney General, or his underlings, may pursue hate crimes indictments
within states if:

A. States do "not intend to exercise jurisdiction" in prosecuting hate
crimes in the way the federal government wants them to. In other words, if a
state wants to prosecute all crime according to physical evidence, not "bias
motivation," and reject a federal ADL hate law for their state, then the
federal government has the right to swoop in and enforce the federal hate
law and its "bias motivation" legal philosophy, whether that state likes it
or not. Sec.7(b)(2)(A)

B. If states do not obtain the kind of verdict the federal government wishes
in a hate crimes trial, the government also has the right to intervene and
violate states' rights, presumably retrying the case to their satisfaction.
Sec.7(b)(2)(D)

Slippery Legislation

By its obscurity and deceptiveness, ADL has crafted S.1145 to
slip like an eel through Congress. This literally happened September 14,
2005 when Amendment 2662 slithered through the House of Representatives in
only 45 minutes! But, this eel has fangs. It squirms toward one dark
objective: Creation of a vast Orwellian anti-hate bureaucracy and police
state with ADL lurking behind the scenes - to seize and silence the
politically incorrect anywhere in America.

From a supreme position of power over all federal and local law
enforcement, the ADL will be able to enforce its twisted definition that
"hate" means bias against federally protected groups, particularly Jews and
homosexuals. All Bible-believing Christians will become "haters," just as
D.A. Lynne Abraham viewed them as they preached in the Philadelphia public
square last year.

Take a Second Look

So, to all who haven't seen a conspiracy in S.1145, even after
reading it, I say: Read it again more deeply. Consider how that similar
ADL/B'nai B'rith legislation has ended free speech in Canada, and European
countries. You must see S.1145 for what it is: possibly the most dangerous
threat to states' rights, evangelical Christianity, free speech, and freedom
itself which has ever been proposed to Congress.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

WHAT WE CAN DO

PROTEST S.1145 TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE SENATE! These
senators are listed at www.truthtellers.org. Call toll free 1-888-355-3588
or toll 1-202-225-3121. With only one phone call, you can be transferred
from one office to the other upon your request, calling all 55 in about 20
minutes. Tell them "I want to express my disapproval of the hate bill
S.1145!"

The members of the Senate Judiciary Committee may well decide
this week to approve S.1145 as part of the Children's Safety Act of 2005,
H.R.3132. As happened in the House of Representatives on September 14th,
this bill could move through the Senate very rapidly. All members of the
Senate, especially Republicans, must hear from you NOW!!!

Email this article to all Republican members of the Senate.
Click on their names at www.truthtellers.org to visit their website and
paste this article into their online email contact form.

about S.1145? Ted Pike's gripping 80-minute video, in
VHS or DVD, "Hate Laws: Making Criminals of Christians," completely explains
the history and objectives of S.1145. Order it for $24.90 at
www.truthtellers.org. or call 503-631-3808.

TALK SHOW HOSTS: Invite Rev. Ted Pike back on the air to
generate a tidal wave of communications to Senate members. Call Rev. Pike at
503-631-3808.

NATIONAL PRAYER NETWORK, P. O. Box 828, Clackamas, OR 97015

Daisy · Oct 11, 2005

Yea! Hurrah for hate & violence!!

carpro · Oct 11, 2005

Hate crime legislation is a waste of time and effort in many different areas.

Another manifestation of the political correctness insanity sweeping the nation.

Robert J Hutton · Oct 13, 2005

This reminds me of a bill being debated in the British Parliament entitled "Incitement to religious hatred". If it passed then a Christian can go to prison for telling a Muslim/Hindu/sikh/Buddhist that he is going to Hell unless he receives Christ.

Incidentally, are you not covered by the 1st amendment on these issues?

Kind regards to all

Bob

poncho · Oct 13, 2005

Originally posted by Robert J Hutton:
This reminds me of a bill being debated in the British Parliament entitled "Incitement to religious hatred". If it passed then a Christian can go to prison for telling a Muslim/Hindu/sikh/Buddhist that he is going to Hell unless he receives Christ.

Incidentally, are you not covered by the 1st amendment on these issues?

Kind regards to all

Bob
Click to expand...

The first amendment only applies to those that can afford the legal expenses to fight for that right in court long enough to win the case.

hillclimber · Oct 14, 2005

Originally posted by carpro:
Hate crime legislation is a waste of time and effort in many different areas.

Another manifestation of the political correctness insanity sweeping the nation.
Click to expand...

This kind of legislation can be far more than that.

Bunyon · Oct 14, 2005

Oh boy! Wait till the Canadians get on your case about this thread. You will be doing a lot of talking. Mercury, where are you my friend?

Gold Dragon · Oct 14, 2005

For those interested, here is the actual bill. I have quoted a few sections that may be of interest.

Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2005

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 1145

...
SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF HATE CRIME.

In this Act, the term `hate crime' has the same meaning as in section 280003(a) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (28 U.S.C. 994 note).

...

SEC. 7. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN HATE CRIME ACTS.

(a) In General- Chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`Sec. 249. Hate crime acts

`(a) In General-

`(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person--

...

`(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, OR DISABILITY-

`(A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability of any person--
...
Click to expand...

Gold Dragon · Oct 14, 2005

The statement in the OP that the bill is taking away states rights is also false. The amendment actually restricts the existing powers of the federal government by adding the statement:

in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B),
Click to expand...

And then goes on to limit the federal government being able to only handle those cases involving the crossing of state or country lines:

`(B) CIRCUMSTANCES DESCRIBED- For purposes of subparagraph (A), the circumstances described in this subparagraph are that--

`(i) the conduct described in subparagraph (A) occurs during the course of, or as the result of, the travel of the defendant or the victim--

`(I) across a State line or national border; or

`(II) using a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce;

`(ii) the defendant uses a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce in connection with the conduct described in subparagraph (A);

`(iii) in connection with the conduct described in subparagraph (A), the defendant employs a firearm, explosive or incendiary device, or other weapon that has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce; or

`(iv) the conduct described in subparagraph (A)--

`(I) interferes with commercial or other economic activity in which the victim is engaged at the time of the conduct; or

`(II) otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce.
Click to expand...

The next section also puts a lot of requirements and restrictions on the federal government, requiring them to consult the state and only work on cases where:

`(A) the State does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to exercise jurisdiction;

`(B) the State has requested that the Federal Government assume jurisdiction;

`(C) the State does not object to the Federal Government assuming jurisdiction; or

`(D) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.
Click to expand...

blueridgewv · Oct 15, 2005

Restrictive measures? Broadening measures....easy for Feds to excercise Carte Blanche. These are legal loopholes, numerous and large enough to weazle in. IT IS FEDERALIZATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ACCORDING TO THEIR PREMISE AND IDEALOGY ENACTED BY THE ADL.

(You can mind Canada's legislation).

IFBChristian · Oct 15, 2005

EVERYONE!!! Pray that this Bill will not be passed. It is HIGH & PAST DUE time for the Army of the Lord to arise & say "We Want America Back!" Tell all your friends and family about this bill and tell them to call their local senator and ask them to please don't vote for it.

emeraldctyangel · Oct 15, 2005

Lynne Abraham had unrestrained power to command her police underlings to arrest the Philadelphia Christians.
Click to expand...

One minute we are police underlings, and the next (usually after someone has taken their television set due to their inability to lock a window) we are the law.

Daisy...my thoughts exactly.

Why Poncho, I didnt know you were thrown in jail for speaking your mind! Tell me where to send the dollar so we can bail you out faster next time.

carpro · Oct 15, 2005

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
For those interested, here is the actual bill. I have quoted a few sections that may be of interest.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2005

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 1145

...

`(a) In General-

`(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person--

...

`(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, OR DISABILITY-

`(A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability of any person--
...

Click to expand...

[/QUOTE]If it read this way:

`(a) In General-

`(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person.
...

`(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, OR DISABILITY-

`(A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person.

Would it not still be a crime?

Gold Dragon · Oct 15, 2005

Originally posted by carpro:
If it read this way:

`(a) In General-

`(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person.
...

`(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, OR DISABILITY-

`(A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person.

Would it not still be a crime?
Click to expand...

Just an fyi that the (1) section section is currently in the United States Code and is being amended/replaced by the (2) section.

The (2) section is a title for the detailed description in (2)(A). So your modification would make the title have nothing to do with the description. Such a law already exists.

carpro · Oct 15, 2005

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by carpro:
If it read this way:

`(a) In General-

`(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person.
...

`(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, OR DISABILITY-

`(A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person.

Would it not still be a crime?
Click to expand...

Just an fyi that the (1) section section is currently in the United States Code and is being amended/replaced by the (2) section.

The (2) section is a title for the detailed description in (2)(A). So your modification would make the title have nothing to do with the description. Such a law already exists. [/QUOTE]And one is just as useless and pointless as the other.

freedom's cause · Oct 18, 2005

christians should be on the ball with this one
we must enter into mosques record the messages
have someone decode them and sue every mosque in
America that preaches hate against christians or otherwise we can and should use this to our advantage and close down every mosque preaching hate or distributing hate literature in America

Gold Dragon · Oct 18, 2005

Originally posted by freedom's cause:
christians should be on the ball with this one
we must enter into mosques record the messages
have someone decode them and sue every mosque in
America that preaches hate against christians or otherwise we can and should use this to our advantage and close down every mosque preaching hate or distributing hate literature in America
Click to expand...

I would hope Christians would be more interested in spending their time being loving witnesses of Christ to muslims than recording their sermons to entrap them.

Gold Dragon · Oct 20, 2005

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
Just an fyi that the (1) section section is currently in the United States Code and is being amended/replaced by the (2) section.

The (2) section is a title for the detailed description in (2)(A). So your modification would make the title have nothing to do with the description. Such a law already exists.
Click to expand...

A correction. I was wrong about section (1) being currently in the code and it being replaced by section (2).

Here is the 2000 edition of the United States Code.

United States Code : Title 18, Part I, Chapter 13 - Civil Rights

Section 249 does not exist and is the proposed bill to be added.

carpro · Oct 20, 2005

Thank you for the correction.
Back to my original question.

Leaving out these words, " because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person--"

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:

Originally posted by carpro:
[qb]If it read this way:

`(a) In General-

`(1) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person.
...

`(2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, OR DISABILITY-

`(A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person.

Would it not still be a crime?
Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Robert J Hutton · Oct 26, 2005

Further to my earlier post you may be interested to know that the Upper House (House of Lords) in the UK parliament has voted by a large majority to "water down" the Government's planned attempt to make "incitement to religous hatred" a criminal offence.

The govt. can overturn this but it is lergley believed that they will seek a compromise.

Kind regards and Christian love to all.

Bob

"Anti-Hate" Senate Bill S.1145 threat to Christian liberty in America

blueridgewv Member

Daisy New Member

carpro Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Robert J Hutton New Member

poncho Well-Known Member

hillclimber New Member

Bunyon New Member

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

blueridgewv Member

IFBChristian New Member

emeraldctyangel New Member

carpro Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

carpro Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

freedom's cause New Member

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

carpro Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Robert J Hutton New Member

Useful Searches

"Anti-Hate" Senate Bill S.1145 threat to Christian liberty in America

blueridgewv Member

Daisy New Member

carpro Well-Known Member Site Supporter

Robert J Hutton New Member

poncho Well-Known Member

hillclimber New Member

Bunyon New Member

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

blueridgewv Member

IFBChristian New Member

emeraldctyangel New Member

carpro Well-Known Member Site Supporter

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

carpro Well-Known Member Site Supporter

freedom's cause New Member

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

carpro Well-Known Member Site Supporter

Robert J Hutton New Member

carpro Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

carpro Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

carpro Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

carpro Well-Known Member
Site Supporter