DeMint Speaks Against Hate Crimes Legislation

[PrisonerNumber9653]

Well, you've made it clear you have no intention of honest debate, you want to ignore the reasons these laws are necessary and judge, and cook up phony reasons to oppose them. The sick bigotry of comparing these crimes to "computer programmers" shows this is a waste of time.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"Well, you've made it clear you have no intention of honest debate"

- i addressed each and every one of your claims point by point.

- all i ask is that you do the same.

My hypothetical that compared gays to computer programmers was made solely to demonstrate you are incapable of providing a definition of 'hate crime' that is not vague enough to apply to virtually every social group.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

Yeah, it will, it takes it away from these yokels, makes the case federal jurisdiction. It has to be done. Its also appropriate because the crimes violate civil rights of all minorities who are terrorized by hate crimes. No harm has been shown except to windbag politicians playing bigotry into campaign contributions from hate groups.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

It's also a despicable and intentional LIE by the Senator to claim this will make "thought crimes". THAT IS A LIE! Beating someone up isn't a thought, it's a violent assault. This will NOT make opinion crime. DeMint's hate and lies are a disgrace to this nation and the notion of justice for ALL that is the most basic notion upon which this nation was founded. This will NOT Protect pedophiles. There are dead and beaten victims being denied justice because of bigotry, bigotry DeMint is defending.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 Beating someone up is already a crime. So this hate crime part of it does punish the thought part of it.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 It is NOT punishing the thought. It is punishing the CRIME, and it's perfectly appropriate for two reasons. First off, EVERY crime considers the reasons, murdering someone in the heat of a fight is very different from planning for weeks to kill someone for insurance money or because they slept with your wife. Secondly, the law makes these federal cases, meaning increased investigation of crimes that local authorities often blow off because of their own bigotry.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 Sorry, but this does punish thought. The difference between premeditation and heat of passion murder has nothing to do with the reason the victim was killed. That difference shows the criminal sofistication and level of criminal intent of the offender to punish 1st degree more severly. These "hate crimes" laws are the only laws that criminalize the motive of a crime. Motive and intent are two separate legal terms. Motive is usually only used to prove guilt, not punish more.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 That's a LIE. It punishes VIOLENT ASSAULT. NOT thought. Yes, the reason someone was killed IS a part of EVERY trial.

The constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. That does NOT exist without hate crimes law. Now, gays are beaten and killed and NOTHING happens because of bigoted cops and judges, hate crimes law keeps that from happening. In the 60s, white juries let off KKK members BRAGGING of lynchings, ONLY by making them federal cases did convictions happen.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 Give me some crimes where the motive influences the sentence. Most times, motive isn't even required to convict. Motive is useful in proving guilty, but it is not required and it never influences the sentence. These laws do not punish violent assault. We've had laws against violent assault for generations. There were no hate crimes laws when KKK convictions happened. The federal law already banned lynchings. These laws punish beliefs and nothing more.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 I already HAVE. It DOES influence the sentence, as it should. These laws do NOTHING but punish violent assault. Yes, we have laws against it, laws NOT BEING ENFORCED when the victims are minorities or especially gay. The convictions before happened ONLY because the FBI stepped in, and these laws ensure FEDERAL investigation and prosecution, it's exactly the same. The law banned lynchings, yet THOUSANDS happened and those responsible got off.

These laws do NOT punish beliefs.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 Senator DeMint is protecting our right to form opinions and not be punished for them. In your last response you said that violent assault and murder were the same thing. FAIL! If we already have laws that criminalize assault at the federal level, all we have to do is start enforcing them when the states won't. Hate crimes laws didn't exist when lynching prosecutions took place. They didn't need to, because lynching was already outlawed. Being racist is legal, lynching isn't.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 Bullshit. He is protecting the "right" to beat the shit out of gay people. he is NOT protecting "opinions", vile as homophobia is, NOBODY has EVER been arrested for what they think. The fact that this most despicable of bigots is in the US Senate proves what CRAP it is to claim there are "thought police".

These laws are appropriate, constitutional, and needed, they will save lives and ensure that equal protection is NOT just words.

LYNCHING WAS HAPPENING ANYWAY!!!!!

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 The CRAP of saying hate crimes laws weren't needed is proven FALSE by the lynching prosecution, it was ONLY by the federal government stepping in that people like Dynamite Bob Chambliss didn't walk free forever. ALL these laws do is the exact same thing.

There is NO reason AT ALL to oppose them except that they hate that it gives protections to gay people. Demint is a bigot, a radical right disgrace to all this nation stands for. He is defending hate and violence.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 Hate crimes laws aren't need, and you proved it yourself with lynching prosecutions. There weren't hate crimes laws back then, and the federal government intervened just fine.

DeMint is right in defending the right to form opinions. Hate is an opinion. We have a constitutional right to hate anyone we want and express that via speech.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 Hate crimes laws are ABSOLUTELY needed. The lynching example shows they ARE. These were INDIVIDUALLY picked out for prosecution by Bobby Kennedy, otherwise, they don't get prosecuted, and STILL don't. There are COUNTLESS cases of gay bashings that have NO prosecution because of bigotry among cops or judges or juries.

Demint is NOT defending the right to form opinions, which ALREADY EXISTS AND IS NOT AFFECTED BY THIS. He's defending gay bashers,that is NOT a right.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 There were no hate crimes laws back then. Lynching is taking somebody from lawful custody to execute them. There is not hate or bias needed there, and Kennedy prosecuted them just fine under those laws. Gay bashings can be prosecuted under laws that punish violent assault, just like all other assaults. You are demeaning the victims of assault by asserting that their cases are less important because they are not gay. In all of DeMint's speech, he never mentioned bashings.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 Robert Kennedy INSTITUTED what was essentially hate crimes law. No OTHER murders were treated like this, but because of the nature of the crimes, and the threats they caused to ALL blacks, he went outside typical jurisdiction and persocutoin. Hate crimes law does nothing more. He DID enforce these laws because of hate and bias. They were NOT Just murders, they were terrorism of ALL BLACK PEOPLE. It was a civil rights violation, as is today's climate of hate towards gays.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 It is ABSOLUTELY NOT GOOD ENOUGH to say they "can be prosecuted". Because they AREN'T being quite often. It's a vile LIE to claim it "demeans" the victims of assault. This does not reduce by ONE SECOND or ONE PENNY the punishment of any other crime. It does NOT say their cases are "less important", as Demint says gay bashings ARE less important, part of a long sick history of hate and bigotry on the part of this rotten excuse for a legislator. No, he IGNORES bashings, as always.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 If somebody's assault case results in a harsher punishment than another's, the government thinks that the first case is more important than the latter. Raising punishments and increasing prosecutions are two separate things. Nice equivocation fallacy, though. He is ignoring bashings in his speech because bashing people is already illegal without regulating thought.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 Which, AGAIN, doesn't reduce by ANYTHING the importance of any other case. Because hate crimes when not enforced threaten ALL members of a class, they ARE worthy of increased attention and prosecution.

It remains a LIE to call this "regulating thought. You are free to think whatever you want. You are NOT free to kill someone because of hate. Yeah, it's illegal, a law NOT being enforced and it's a threat to MANY people. NO reason exists to oppose these laws but bigotry.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 I agree that murder is not okay. That's why we've always had laws that punish murder, many times with the death penalty. If us gay want true equality, that means that they get treated just like everybody else... including when they are victims of crimes. The reason is the belief that this is punishing an opinion. We can debate whether or not that is true until the cows, but it remains a valid reason.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 Equal protection is NOT what we have without hate crimes laws, first of all. Secondly, hate crimes laws ARE equal, a gay person killing a straight solely because of his sexual orientation, unlikely though it may be, IS a hate crime. Blacks have been charged with hate crimes.

This is absolutely NOT punishing an opinion. You can hold any opinion you want, you can't kill people.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 I agree that you can't kill people, and so does Senator DeMint. These laws do not punish murder because murder already is, and always has been, illegal. Be sure to tell all those murderers who were convicted before this hate crime law went into effect that they were wrongly convicted because murder was allowed then.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 What a load of CRAP. Again, these laws will not reduce by ONE PENNY OR ONE SECOND the punishment for any other crimes. If this absurd claim that Demint cares about crime victims were true, he's SUPPORT hate crimes law. He supports crime victims unless they're gay, and that's FAR fromthe only example of his sick, disgusting bigotry. He's a disgrace to this great nation.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 Wrong. The current laws outlaw all violent actions regardless of the victim's race, sexual orientation, etc. Homosexuals victims are treated just the same as heterosexual under the current law.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@freakylocz14 THIS IS A LIE!!! You JUST showed the problem, which is bigots PRETENDING that gays are treated the same under current laws. THEY ARE NOT!!! There are COUNTLESS instances of violent assaults against gays which are BLOWN OFF by bigoted cops, or when someone is arrested they get a slap on the wrist. A person who committed murder was given a pissant sentence by a judge in Texas who said, this is a DIRECT QUOTE--"I don't like queers".

Equal justice is a lie, we NEED these laws.

[freakylocz14]

@PrisonerNumber9653 A federal law won't enhance the sentence of a state case. Do you know anything about the law?

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

- A premeditated murder is a premeditated murder and the culprit should be treated the same regardless of their underlying motivation.

"A person who committed murder was given a pissant sentence by a judge in Texas who said, this is a DIRECT QUOTE--'I don't like queers'"

- that is a travesty of justice, however it should be addressed using a more grass-roots approach and not merely patched with further unjust legislation (hate crime laws)

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@types10000 Hogwash. Murder in the name of bigotry creates fear and unsafe environments for ALL. Allowing gays to be beaten and killed makes ALL gays unsafe. Hate crimes strike at the most basic principles of this nation and ARE different from other murders.

How do you propose "grass roots approach"?? Wait for DECADES until MAYBE there aren't any more bigots?? Please. The ONLY reasonable answer is federal involvement, which hate crimes law does.

NOBODY is harmed by these.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"Murder in the name of bigotry creates fear and unsafe environments for ALL"

- which is irrelevant as it does not change the nature of the crime.

"gays to be beaten and..."

- but that isnt what's happening, the CURRENT legislation affords no more leniency for gays to be beaten than for straight people to be beaten. Any bigotry is on the behalf of the INDIVIDUAL agencies of law enforcement and should be addressed as such NOT by applying UNJUST legislation as a patch.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@types10000 That's crazy, of COURSE it's relevant that hate crimes create an atmosphere of violence against other gays being OK.

Gays being beaten IS what's happening, and this addresses that and increases safety for them while NOT discriminating against majorities, whether whites or straights, should they be victimized by a hate crime.

This isn't remotely unjust legislation, and while I agree it'd be great to get rid of homophobic judges and racist cops, it's not likely to happen any time.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"That's crazy, of COURSE it's relevant that hate crimes create an atmosphere of violence against other gays being OK."

- you've failed to present any reason why it would change the nature of crime

ie. why does the fact 'it creates a violent atmosphere' (which i contest because it's pure inference) mean that the person should receive a harsher sentence? you have no justification.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"Gays being beaten IS what's happening, and this addresses that and increases safety for them..."

you've missed the point completely, my statement was about what THE LEGISLATION entails and how introducing the unjust laws you purpose is not a lawful means of addressing those individuals who fail to uphold the legislation.

"This isn't remotely unjust legislation" - incorrect, as i already pointed-out the punishment must fit the crime.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"The ONLY reasonable answer is federal involvement, which hate crimes law does."

that is not a reasonable answer:

- for a punishment to be just, it must fit the crime

- the nature of the crime doesnt change based on the feelings of those who hear about it.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@types10000 The punishment DOES fit the crime, which is often NOT the case without federal involvement.

and it's BALDERDASH to claim the nature of the crime doesn't change based upon motivation. The "feelings of those who hear about it" is NOT what this is about, it IS however about violence against gays being a threat to ALL gay people, and making sure they have EQUAL protection under the law, which they now very clearly do not have.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"The punishment DOES fit the crime..."

prove it by providing a justification, why should a crime committed against an individual because he is gay warrant a harsher sentence than if it is carried out due to any other arbitrary attribute (Unless the perpetrator is a psychopath it WILL be based on SOME attribute or collection thereof)

"it's BALDERDASH to claim the nature of the crime doesn't change based upon motivation" - stating it's balderdash does not an argument make

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@types10000 Because, AGAIN, it causes an atmosphere of fear in ALL gay people, makes ALL gays less safe, it is NOT equal protection under the law, which is a constitutional requirement.

And it's OBVIOUS the motivation changes the crime, a hate crime is NOT involuntary manslaughter is NOT killing someone for their wallet is NOT a dealer killing another dealer is NOT a woman shooting an abusive husband OR that husband beating his wife to death. ALL those are murder, and ALL are different.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"Because, AGAIN, it causes an atmosphere of fear in ALL gay people, makes ALL gays less safe"

- that is what you claim to be happening, not a justification for how it changes the nature of the crime.

- as i already pointed out it is pure inference on the part of the gay community and 'the feelings of people who hear about it' does not change a punishment.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@types10000 You truly have no clue about the nature of this country if you think there's no problem with a pattern of violence against minorities causing a threat to ALL. Equal protection under the law isn't some vague liberal pipedream, it's constitutional law.

It's horseshit to call the threat "inference". It's not feelings, it's not inference, the threat is REAL, and to do nothing about it isn't just immoral, it's against the law.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"You truly have no clue about the nature of this country"

- says the man who advocates laws which he can neither define nor justify.

if violence committed against gays (motivated by the fact they are gay) is a hate crime then so too is violence committed against computer programmers (motivated by the fact they are computer programmers)

if your argument is 'well not a allot of people are doing that to computer programmers' then specify how many. Reductio ad absurdum.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"The feelings of those who hear about it is NOT"

- really? because that's all you've said so far.

ie. claiming that it creates a 'violent atmosphere for gays' relies on pure inference by individuals within the gay community, it is 'the feelings of those who hear about it'

"threat to ALL gay people" - just like violence against rich people is a threat to all rich people; with the way you banter it, i doubt you could find any premeditated violence that isnt a hate crime

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@types10000 It's not "feelings", it's REALITY, they ARE threatened by violence, to say that's just "feelings" and do nothing about it is insane. Just nuts.

NO, violence against rich people is NOT a threat to all rich people, there is not only NOT a pattern of not invesitgating or prosecuting those crimes, they get EXTRA attention.

And NO, very few violent crimes are hate crimes.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"It's not feelings, it's REALITY, they ARE threatened by violence"

- incorrect, they are hearing about it, interpreting it and then using that as a basis for feeling threatened. that IS their 'feelings'.

"NO, violence against rich people is NOT a threat to all rich people"

- you make this statement but provide no justification

"...NOT a pattern of not invesitgating or prosecuting those crime"

- whether or not it is investigated does change who the crime is directed at.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@types10000 Bullshit. It's not "feelings", it's REALITY. They ARE threatened.

Where the hell is "Richbashing" going on??

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

Me: 'How is violence directed against gay people because they are gay any different to violence directed against rich people because they are rich?'

You: 'NO, violence against rich people is NOT a threat to all rich people'

Me: 'What makes it different?'

You: 'There is no pattern of not invesitgating or prosecuting those crimes'

NO, Your statement is non-sequitur (logical fallacy). the level of investigation says nothing about HOW THE CRIMES differ

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@types10000 Bullshit, it is EXACTLY what makes them different--there is also NOT a pattern of violence against the wealthy because they're wealthy, and CERTAINLY is not a pattern of such violence being NOT investigated or prosecuted. That's not a non-sequitur (and I know what that means) it's a FACT.

And STILL one thing remains--not a SINGLE remotely justified reason to NOT have hate crimes laws. NOBODY"S showed how anyone is harmed by them.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

1).

"Bullshit, it is EXACTLY what makes them different"

- care to provide an argument for that? or perhaps address my argument or something other than stating your opinion.

"there is also NOT a pattern of violence against the wealthy..."

- which is completely irrelevant, unless of-course your trying to say 'lots of people have to do it for it to become a hate crime' which i find childish and hilarious.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

2).

"and CERTAINLY is not a pattern of such violence being NOT investigated or prosecuted"

- as i already pointed out this is a complete non-sequitar (logical fallacy) because the increasing the punishment does not have any impact on the fact the crimes are not going through due process to begin with.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"And STILL one thing remains--not a SINGLE remotely justified reason to NOT have hate crimes laws. NOBODY"S showed how anyone is harmed by them. "

- incorrect, what remains is the fact you have been unable to provide logical justifications for introducing hate crime legislation.

- The fact it's so illogical has been demonstrated by your continued failure to define it in such a way that it wouldnt apply to virtually EVERY group eg. the rich, computer programmers .etc

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@types10000 Lie. The reasons HAVE been given, repeatedly. NO reason to OPPOSE them has been given.

It's bigotry at it's worst to call protecting the rights of all people equally "illogical".

Computer programmers? What a vile, bigoted comparison. People CHOOSE to be computer programmers, and there is literally NOBODY threatening them, NO Judges or cops refusing to pursue those who attack them out of hate for computer programmers.

[types10000]

@PrisonerNumber9653

"Lie. The reasons HAVE been given, repeatedly"

- each 'reason' you provided had a logical flaw in it which i easily identified. you dont get to claim they are reasons if they've been demonstrated to be incorrect.

"It's bigotry at it's worst to call protecting the rights of all people equally" - that isnt what's is happening, you are attempting to afford special rites in specific cases and failing to provide a logical justification.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

And YES, some crimes ARE worse. Beating someone in a fight over a girl is wrong. Beating someone because they're gay threatens ALL gay people. The KKK bull of "Political correctness" is a baldfaced LIE. Straight people are protected by these laws. So are white people. This law will move us closer to REAL equal protection, it is NOT a special class. This is NOT making them "more equal" it will make them equal, and NOW gays and blacks ARE less equal. Crimes against them are NOT equally prosecuted.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

It's a despicable, unAmerican LIE to say this undermines what our soldiers fight for. In fact, the most basic principles are DEFENDED by hate crimes laws. It does NOT 'overextend' federal law enforcement, it uses them appropriately to make Americans safer. It ONLY insults local law enforcement when they're REFUSING to enforce the law, as is often happening in these cases. This IS about rule of law, it's not against it. Hate crimes are illegal, but are NOT prosecuted! These laws are NEEDED.

[PoetsReach]

If motive doesn't mater in the court of law when charges are brought and sentences handed down I don't think many people would like what would happen. Fore one thing you wouldn't be able to plead self-defense, pleading insanity would also no longer be an option. If it doesn't mater why you beat someone to death, then it doesn't mater why you beat them to death. No exceptions, right?

[duvexy]

Hate crimes are just double jeopardy. For example is someone attacked someone they should be charged for that only. If Hate crimes come in then not only is the attack being charged but also the hate crimes. This is double jeopardy.

[PrisonerNumber9653]

@duvexy Lie. Hate crimes are NOT double jeopardy. It's the SAME CRIME, and the SAME TRIAL, not double jeopardy. The attack IS the hate crime.

[Prsnhoot]

I just took a shit!

[thepoundsmoker]

"Fuck are some Americans retarded!!! Have fun learning Mandarin..... thats chinky talk for all you patriots!!!! Please vote Palin to the White House so I can laugh as your country burns (;{}"

[goingfor11]

The legislation has really nothing to do with hate crimes, its about making another step towards dictatorship. To aid in the implementation of one world govt. Which is being slipped through the back door under the global warming scam. Read the Copenhagen treaty.Agenda 21. For the greater good of the earth. The UN website. Our country and govt has been hijacked by banks and the elite.They use our military to police the globe, stole the wealth and industry while our elected officials got rich!

[Leatherbubba]

Demint started the recession.

[DandyAndy827]

DeMint is too intelligent and eloquent for all you hateful liberals to understand. He is right on. "Hate crimes" are already ready crimes. If you kill, kidnap, or vandalize someone's property, you are committing a crime. It doesn't matter what the victim's race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc is. To give one person a different punishment than another person who committed the same crime simply because their victim's belonged to different groups, is hateful in of itself

[chattreb]

Jim Demint for President!!!

[iluvsystemofadown]

Jim DeMint is a hateful donkey.

[soeasylivin]

Gotta keep the niggers and faggots happy or there will be rioting and cocksucking in the streets.

[GovernmentSham912]

the book "Roots" was banned because it was considered hate speech

keep that in mind

[SmashDiversity3]

Hate crimes are a fraud. They only charge whites with them.

[ConnerAndAlexChannel]

Okay, STOP! This insulting people in the video or who have commented is getting us NOWHERE. I happen to be a white, straight, Christian girl and am great friends with a lesbian where I used to live, so let no one say that I am in ANY way biased. Everyone deserves equal justice under the law; that is what people who oppose hate crimes legislation are trying to accomplish. We WANT minorities and homosexuals to be protected; we DON'T want them to be lifted above everyone else. That's it.

--Alex

[morfingaunt]

@ConnerAndAlexChannel

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your hate crimes stance, but it is fucking LAUGHABLE (and by that, I actually mean despicable) that you think you are in NO WAY biased just because you happen to have a close friend who is lesbian. You have no idea at all what it is like to be part of a minority; do not even begin to pretend that you do just cos you "have a friend" who is a member of the LGBTQ community.

You actually disgust me with such a remark.

[xaviqaz]

@morfingaunt Every crime is a hate crime. And a white, straight, christian person deserves exactly the SAME protection.

[ConnerAndAlexChannel]

@morfingaunt She's defending her cause. You can't stand that she has a valid point, and you don't have a satisfying remark to justify that. I whole-heartedly AGREE with my FRIEND who I am ON THE CHANNEL WITH! And actually, Miss Know-It-All, how the heck do even know if I might not be part of a minority, I know tons of lesbians. In fact, I might be one for all you know. Okay, so back up. I love you Alex, so don't listen to this crack head.

~Conner

[scottiebobson]

If you don't want to be prosecuted under this new law, then don't commit a violent crime.

[GradStud28]

Spoken like a white, straight, Christian, man. (Though I'm one too and couldn't disagree with him more.) And all this time I just thought he was a horribly incompetent and obstructive legislator -- turns out he's a bigot too.

South Carolinians, you need to throw this man out on his äss next time at the polls.

[MsEspejismo]

This Man is a total IDIOT!

He speaks so much about FREEDOM, but thinks homosexuals are immorale, he speaks on FREEDOM but thinks that other cultures are unGOD like. He speaks of FREEDOM but says that hate crimes have nothing to do with Hate or Crime.

He speaks of FREEDOM but says that the governmnet needs to go back to the ways of HIS god.

And he wants to be a president? Freedom is for everyone not just who one group of people feel deserves it.

[rockybottomseed]

homosexuals ARE immoral and unclean ....you probley are too

[wponds]

Thanks Senator DeMint. We need more people like you in Congress. Only a selfish person would disagree with you. Only someone who believes that one person is somehow more important than another. Every crime should have the same punishment for every person regardless of their demographic. A murderer, a rapist or a child molester should be put to death, a thief should have to pay back what was stolen. If we had more strict punishment then we wouldn't have any "hate crimes".

[sportbowler1]

"does not provide more protection" that is (grammar mistake)

[sportbowler1]

Yes this is a real stretch. For one, hate crimes law does not give more better protection to any one group. Example: Crimes against heterosexuals motivated by hatred towards heterosexuals in punishable just like hate crimes against homosexuals. Hate crimes against Christians is punishable similar to hate crimes against Muslims, or Jews, etc.

Second - this is NOT thought crime. No thoughts are crime but rather ACTIONABLE crime motivated out of hate is subject to greater sentence.

[bke274]

@sportbowler1 .....how do we know whether or not a crime was motivated by hate unless we can read the person's mind or know what's in his/her heart?

[marcyjanine]

Sen. DeMint, I am glad we have you Coburn and Paul in there fighting for the ppl. Thank you for your service to this country.

[PuffyCatTail]

Boy, this guy is reaching. Lol

[rbmshow]

When all of you people that really think this is a good idea step into the business end of saying the wrong thing I want you to remember this moment.

[tzushih]

I don't plan on committing any violent crimes, so I think I'm fine, thanks.

[biancocraxi]

this country is doomed. be patient and wait till the right time comes to tear it all down.

[liberty4patriots]

Just a distraction from:

The U.S. House & Senate have voted themselves $4,700 and $5,300 raises.

But.

1. You voted to not give eligible Americans a S.S. cost of living raise in 2010 and 2011.

2. Our Medicaid premiums will go up $285.60 for the 2-years and

you will not get the 3% COLA: $660/yr. Your total 2-yr loss and cost is

-$1,600 or -$3,200 for husband and wife.

3. But, over 2-yrs you each get $10,000.

Doesn't seem fair does it?

[chazdaspazman]

thanks jim you are a great american.

[tzushih]

Wow, could Sen. DeMint be more of a douche? He's actually standing up for violence against his gay fellow Americans? What an embarrassment to South Carolina.

Then again, he also just came out as pro-rape. Figures he'd be a scumbag all around.

[callouschristian]

I wonder why republicans like demint need groups to hate, wars to fight, to operate. It seems the only way they can progress is by making people scared or having groups to marginalize(my group goes to heaven, this group gets "left behAHnd"). Then I realize this tactic enables them to never have to voice their racist stances but it is very unconstituional and certainly not anything close to christian.This vid is an example of why the republican party is so difficult to watch these days.

[kzac2]

You call yourself Christian and you are not wiling to fight for the right to live in this free nation? You have been brain washed. Have you never actually read the bible? Do you think wars are not written there? Do you think God does not hate specific things (especially homosexuality), it is written. We have always been a peaceful helpful nation but don't tread on this nation. We will defend our selves and have the right to do so. Don't forget who started this fight... Ishmael.

[kzac2]

This is just another attempt to eliminate the word of God in the United States. Those of the Doctrine of Hegel assume they will use this law to crush any and all attempts to teach the word of God. Those that designed and voted for this bill hate God and hate his word. What will be discovered in the first court case is that it will be difficult if not impossible to use this law for prosecution as it is in opposition to the first amendment of the constitution.

[SechyoolarYOOESAY]

@kzac2

Arguing with you is pointless because you clearly don't see or agree with the separation of church and state in our country. Christianity is just another controlling religion, just like every religion.

In the US, it is illegal to favor one religion over another, I'm sure you know this is you pay the smallest bit of attention to the government.

How do you account for Muslim/Judaism/Hinduism teachings in America if Christianity is allowed to be taught? Answer: YOU CANT

[kzac2]

Sechyoolar,

You obviously have not ever actually read the first amendment of the constitution. "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion" Where did you come up with separation of church and state from that? Oh and our current congress is writing law respecting the establishment of religion. Maybe you should actually read the doctrine of Hegel. It includes a complete religious doctrine.

[SechyoolarYOOESAY]

@kzac2

The first amendment clearly defines that the government shall not endorse a religion...it's a neutral entity. You can practice your delusion all you want and nobody can give you crap for it....but forcing your pathetic beliefs on other people is against the rules.....

May I remind you that there is scientific data that proves an inverse relationship between religiosity and intelligence?

It's a very sad thing when people let the bible do the thinking for them....get a mind of ur own!

[SechyoolarYOOESAY]

You will never see prayer in public schools, you will never see abortion overturned and you will never see our country endorse a single religion....I know you'd love that, but the fundies like yourself drive away moderate people....

To end: You will waste your entire life going to church, praying, hoping god will change things for you and give you good fortune, BUT you will be sadly disappointed when you realize there never was a god. Think outside of the tiny box your in!

[kzac2]

How pitiful, to only have for ones belief the limited understanding of man and worse the belief that this flesh is the only life that exists.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. You are the product of the doctrine of philosophy, which is the foundation of all socialism, communism, progressivism, and darwinism. True sadness will come when you realize God really exists

[SechyoolarYOOESAY]

@kzac2

ROFL...Dude if you want to live in a theocracy, go to the middle east...see how much they respect your christian faith. Until then, stay out of our government. Our country was meant to be secular whether you like it or not.

Quoting the bible doesn't get you anywhere because it was written by man to control men!

When you let the bible do all the thinking for you, you are nothing but a mindless sheep being controlled by theocratic thugs. Think outside of the box! Stay in School!

[wgmyler]

@SechyoolarYOOSAY

It's obvious that you have no shame in being an angry, bitter, anti-Christ.

Of course, you have the right to your opinions & speech...just know that you look like a complete douche...having so much anger & hate toward the Bible & Christian beliefs that served as the motivation & inspiration for the majority of the founding fathers that worked so hard to protect those rights.

And, what does that have to do w/ hate crimes? DeMint is spot on...esp. about thought crimes.

[ca1977a]

@kzac2 What an utterly miserable, empty, defeatist attitute to have towards the life we're living right now.

[tzushih]

Come on, did you even read what the law does? We've had the exact same language on the books for 40 years addressing crimes based on a victim's ethnicity or choice of religion. All this does is add sexual orientation to that same list.

No one's ever been prosecuted for criticizing someone else's religion, and no one's going to be prosecuted for spouting religious nonsense about gays. Rest assured your First Amendment right to hate on gays is perfectly safe.

[kzac2]

Romans ..God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature. And likewise also the men leaving the natural use of the woman burned in their lust one toward another: men with men working that which is unseemly and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which is meet.

.knowing the judgement of God, they which commit such things are worthy of death, no only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

[hirize1]

Thank you Senator Demint. I've never heard a more clearly defined and eloquent explanation of "legislative extortion" and the politicizing of the rule of law as you gave here. My hat is off to you!

[spottyrockstar1]

I strongly agree with you. This guy talks like he has some sense.

[JasonRP12NH]

Jim DeMint for president.

[ncladyKarol]

I know about crimes, I know because I lost a child. I do not want a hate crime added to any bill. All killers and killers of hate crimes should be treated equally. In court with a fair trial. I just wish my son's killer could be tried, but we will never know who did it.

[kzac2]

Karol, Don't worry, God is well aware of who killed you son and he will deal with that person in due time. One can never get away with murder. His murder was observed and fully documented in the eyes of God. The murderer will answer for his/her actions, he/she can not escape Gods judgment.

[wingnut4427]

I'm a Christian. Will this Bill protect me from Atheists & Liberals who don't agree with me & attack me for My views? I doubt it.

[stlvideo08]

Yes, all crimes should be treated equally. That's why we have different penalties for burglary, murder, rape, etc. *eye roll*

If you knew anything about anything, you'd know there is already hate crime protection for religious reasons. You'd also know the difference between free speech and a crime. But if you're listening to this guy, you don't understand what free speech is (he thinks it's a crime!)

[wingnut4427]

Did I make any reference to other crimes? I am indeed aware of all of the laws put in place for each & every crime. And as for freedom of speech I demonstrated it with My comment up there. I also understand that this is your opinion & you have a right to it just the same as I have the right to think that your a jack ass. I already know that the legislation He's talking about isn't necessary. I guess that sarcasm doesn't translate too well in text. But You wouldn't understand that would you?

[pjrizo]

your missing the point. If you listened to the video you would see that his point is there this new hate crimes isn't about hate or crimes its about special priviledges for a certain class of people. Like protection for religious free speech, which is tested every day by the way here in American there is already protection for real hate crimes against any and all citizens.

[GLeNss]

hate crime is stupid its still a fkin crime.

@wingnut4427:

You should only be protected from them physically attacking you or your property not if they have different views. Liberal christians do exist.

Free speech should be protected at all costs, if you dont like what others have to say dont listen or just stfu

[wingnut4427]

"Liberal christians do exist" WHAT !? lol I hate to break it to you.. but that is a complete oxymoron. How can you call yourself a christian & support abortion or gay marriage? How can you justify taking from one group forcefully & giving to another? I agree that Free speech should be protected at all cost but you have to understand what you speak it is also another right to disagree with you based on their own personal convictions & you have to respect that. Supporting free speech & telling

[wingnut4427]

me to stfu is a big indication that You really have no idea what your talking about or what it means to be a free American.

[hirize1]

Amen!

[SechyoolarYOOESAY]

Yes, that is indeed a hate crime if they attack you because of it. But I wouldnt worry about that anytime soon because atheists & liberals don't really give a shit about you conservatards. If you are trying to shove your moronic superstition down the throats of other people, then you deserve to get your ass whooped if you don't stop....plain and simple.

Finally, a law that protects gay people. Equality is coming soon my friends, just hold on a little longer...

[wingnut4427]

Who says that I personally am trying to shove My beliefs down anyone's throats? From My perspective it is You that is attempting to shove your beliefs on me. "then you deserve to get your ass whooped if you don't stop" This was the mind set that Hitler has towards the Jews back during WWII. So how does this make you any better? Nothing I have said was opposed to your having rights. I merely stated that I don't agree based upon My own moral convictions. I am not the one speaking hatefully. u are

[SechyoolarYOOESAY]

No....Hitler wanted to force his beliefs down the throats of others....the Jews wanted to be left alone to practice what they wanted. They didn't give a shit about trying to convert Hitler to Judaism.

Everyone is born with the right not be discriminated against...this includes gay people. How do I try to shove my beliefs at you by making everyone have equal rights? Is it your belief they aren't worthy of equal rights?

[wingnut4427]

I'll put it to you this way. Every ( FEDERAL ) law that is put in place only serves to step on the toes of someone somewhere. So with this in mind. Let's say a gay couple goes into a church wanting to get married. And the preacher or priest .. or whoever refuses to marry them on the basis of his or her religion they gay couple can claim it is out of hate. How does it serve the preacher? And believe it or not this law only serves to protect a small sect in the united states. It's a bad law.

[SechyoolarYOOESAY]

@wingnut4427

That's just it.....Gay people don't give a flying fuck about religion. If they do, if one church turns them down, just go to the next church....Not every church is fundie!

Besides, the law clearly only prosecutes someone for a hate crime if they inflict bodily harm on someone...Why don't you try reading it....NOWHERE does it say that priests will be persecuted because they won't wed gay couples.

[wingnut4427]

Then doesn't this mean We are all guilty of hate crime? I mean .. We did send our troops over seas to kill innocent people who had nothing to do with 9/11. I did read it. The law like many in the books today will be twisted & abused to mean what ever the hell they want it to mean.

[kzac2]

You are incorrect, Hitler (who Obama is most like) wanted to kill the Jews because he did not like them, due to there unending success even in troubled times. This administration, like Hitler is using US law to silence Christians forever. Most people are not aware that 18 USC 241 already accomplishes this task. This law has only one focus, to end Christian teaching in the United States. Watch and see who is arrested or shut down with this law

[SechyoolarYOOESAY]

@kzac2

YOU have to be courteous towards your fellow Americans by not trying to force your beliefs on other people. That is why we have the establishment clause. Not all of us are brainwashed and believe the same crap you Christians do. That's why you can't have prayer in public schools, or any other government run activity can't endorse one religion over another.

Understand why God is not an important part of having a successful country...look at Western Europe! Get out of the South already!

[SechyoolarYOOESAY]

@wingnut4427

Hate crimes have special meaning....they are constructed in a way as to put fear into communities of people by threat of violence. This is why the Matthew Shepard Act is a good bill to pass. It is a hate crime if you are attacked because of something you believe in.

Now, attacking and harming someone physically is one thing and disagreeing vehemently with someone is another.

[wingnut4427]

95% of our country's violent crimes stem from government intervention. I could go on for hours about the drug war but 500 characters isn't enough. Every time our government puts a law in place they take one more piece of all of our liberty's. I agree that violence against any group of people based on their beliefs or life styles needs to be handled but We already have laws that take care of those things. This law only adds one more brick on the pile. It is unnecessary & will be abused.

[kzac2]

We have already been through this and a law was enacted 18 USC 241, so why is there another law needed? The Gays are just being used as an excuse to eliminate a larger focus, the teaching of Christianity. The word of God and the Law of God both teach against homosexuality. This will make teaching this word and law a hate crime. GET IT?

[callouschristian]

WRONG. The bible says nothing about sex! It does emphatically speak out against working in the same room with women having their periods and victimiizing the poor. It also speaks out against loaning money with interest...hmm. Do you think that this might be the reason that more and more your logic falls on deaf ears? Don't even get me started on where it gets you with your profoundly poor choice in political leaders.

[kzac2]

WRONG? Romans 1:26, ...even there women did change the natural use into that which is against nature. 27) And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which is meet. So, my comment was not WRONG and yes the bible does mention sex, and yes specifically homosexuality, which is an abomination to God.

[callouschristian]

This was an important landmark for the Obama Administration and one of the many examples of how he has more accomplishment in his pinky than you can wring out of eight years of ANY republican administration but ESPECIALLY the Bush Assault on our country funded and supported by many posters on this page I'm sure.

[ttall8ball]

The Bible does talk about sex, It just says it differently like Man with man, etc. Read alittle more and know before you speak!

Ignorance is no excuse!

[kzac2]

Are you delusional?

While rome is burning (our economy is failing and unemployment is continually climbing), this administration focuses on programs which increased taxes and costs. (state run health care, state run cap and trade, and forced unions). This hate crimes legislation is so bad that they had to attach it to the bill which funds our troops in order to get it passed. Our economy should be the primary focus. And no their stimulus isn't working.

[callouschristian]

The Obama Admininistration focuses on cleaning up the messes of the Bush Administration which practically destroyed our country. The last thing Bush did was LIE to us to get us to fork over 700 billion dollars to corporations who brought us here in the first place.That is after he lied to us and the world about two wars which we now know were orchestrated by Cheney out of greed. And now you sit around and blame others for your actions-typical and exactly why the republicans must GO.

[rungy07]

Thank you congressman !!

[GoldenBoughTrader]

Isn't interesting Congress would remove all the hurdles and rush a bill like this through when ostensibly it only affects/protects a small percentage of Americans, not to mention that we already have laws which protect Americans against violence of any type--so this is a completely redundant and gratuitous piece of legislation, and that's being polite.

Yet, HR1207, which pertains to the survival of the United States as a nation is blocked at every turn. Who's running this country anyway?

[stretch34318]

I wish he would call out, name the names of the people who attached this hate crimes legislation.

[cdo4Jesus]

stretch, you may be able to find that info at congressdot org

This bill really stinks and will end up stifling speech in church and elsewhere. Churches & family/faith based organizations will most likely end up being censored.