"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." - Thomas JeffersonHave you seen this bill currently making its way through the United States Congress?
The history behind the bill is interesting: it originally started out as the "Matthew Shepherd Act," named after the young Wyoming homosexual of the same name, who was murdered because of his sexual orientation.
"On March 20, 2007, the Matthew Shepard Act (HR 1592) was introduced as federal bipartisan legislation in the U.S. Congress, sponsored by Democrat John Conyers with 171 co-sponsors. Matthew's parents, Judy and Dennis, were present at the introduction ceremony. The bill passed the House of Representatives on May 3, 2007. Similar legislation passed in the Senate on September 27, 2007 (S 1105), but President Bush has indicated he may veto the legislation if it reaches his desk.This sort of legislation is already making headway in Canada and has been implemented in Sweden as well. Even worse, a Canadian court has rules that certain scriptures contained in the Bible can be considered "hate speech."
On December 10, 2007, congressional powers had failed to get a bipartisan bill passed, which would update the hate crimes legislation, also attached to the Department of Defense Authorization bill. However, Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, says "she is still committed to getting the Matthew Shepard Act passed." Pelosi plans on trying to get the bill passed early in 2008. "
I lived in Fort Collins, Colorado, where I was attending graduate school at the time of Shepherd's murder. A brother of my roommate was good friend's with Shepherd at time, so while I witnessed such a tragedy in terms of location, I also witnessed tragedy on a more personal level."
Unbelievable. While Muslims exhort their fellow terrorists to kill anyone that draws a cartoon negatively depicting Mohammed with a bomb on his head, the Western World is shamelessly pandering to those who can easily a fatwah, rather than those in a religion (see: Christianity) who are taught to turn the other cheek and love thy neighbor.
But, as the liberals are wont to do, it's getting out of hand. It's evolved from targeting senseless violence against intolerant people to now targeting dissenting voices, who believe that "alternative lifestyles" are an abomination, a sin, an affront to God, etc. Doesn't the First Amendment protect dissenting voices?
We've heard and seen the liberals stamping their feet because they believe the Bush Administration, in its effort to protect the American citizenry, conduct warrantless wiretapping on international calls. We've heard them cry that the government is eavesdropping on all of our phone calls.
Does anyone REALLY think that's happening? Perhaps I should, does anyone with a semblance of common sense really believe the government is eavesdropping on calls, for example, between my fiance and me, or even worse, my MOTHER and me.
No, I don't think so.
Ironically, the Left, the champions of the nanny state, wish to control every facet of our lives, whether it's curbing fast food intake, rummaging through our garbage, and meting out economic justice (i.e. redistributing wealth).
The Leninists actually have the audacity to accuse the Bush Administration of curbing our basic civil rights. Yet, right before our eyes, they're attempting to control our very lives.