Pat Robertson opposes hate-crimes laws for Gay folks. But these laws are effective. Why encourage violence?

Question

Why would Pat Robertson support violence toward Gay people?

Answer 1

isn't it a bigger question as to why on earth our president believes the same thing?! (see website below)

here is the white house's stance:

"state and local criminal laws already provide penalties for the crimes defined by the bill and 'there has been no persuasive demonstration of any need to federalize such a potentially large range of violent crime enforcement.' "

which seems in directs opposition to the fact that the "FBI figures that there have been more than 113,000 hate crimes since 1991, including 7,163 in 1995. It said that racially motivated bias accounted for 55 percent of those incidents, religious bias for 17 percent, sexual orientation bias for 14 percent and ethnicity bias for 14 percent."

so 15,820 attacks based on sexual orientation don't merit a special law but 19,210 attacks based on religion do?!?!

Answer 2

When Pat Robertson speaks out in favor of the removal of Religion from the same set of hate crimes laws, maybe he can be viewed as something other than a self-serving hypocrite, peddling fear for personal gain- at least on that issue. After all, the same made-up rhetoric that the right is spewing about the dangers of adding sexual orientation to the existing laws is at least as applicable to religion today, because if it were actually true- and any adult capable of independent though knows it's not- they could already be jailed for saying a person has to accept Jesus in order to be saved, since this could be classified as "hate speech" to a Jew or a Muslim. Pure nonsense since such speech is explicitly protected in the Constitution.

And, why do such people like to see violence and persecution toward gay people, and salivate over stories of gays committing suicide, getting into drugs, or contracting AIDS? Because it reinforces the belief that to be gay and out is a miserable, dangerous, lonely existence.

Answer 3

God forbid I should ever play apologist for Pat Robertson, but there are concerns--and I think legitimate ones, though the Religious Right has, in typical form, blown them out of proportion--that hate crime legislation addresses the mindset behind a crime rather than the crime itself, which makes it a crime to have "bad thoughts" against someone. Some fear that this could have a chilling effect on unpopular speech (in this case, speech which is critical of gay people and so-called "gay issues"). I am against unlawful force being used against anyone, but I am also concerned about where hate crime legislation might lead.

I think we'd do better to work on enforcing already existing laws that deal with prosecuting the actual crimes rather than the mindset behind them.

Answer 4

Then gay folks might get the idea that there is nothing wrong with being gay. Since when ISN'T Pat Robertson a jerk? Why would this new bit of foolishness surprise you?

Answer 5

via fact they are no longer surely "Christ like". nonetheless homosexuality is a sin in accordance to the bible, so is homicide. Jesus does no longer condone actual violence against a gay person. yet asserting that homosexuality is immoral is loose speech and is not any longer a hate crime. i'm not sure that homosexuals desire specific risk-free practices. i think of each and every physique deserve risk-free practices against attack and homicide. They deserve risk-free practices against battery and sources destruction if somebody defaces their sources. So do Muslims, Jews and Christians. i do no longer see one group as extra helpful than yet another on the subject of the punishment given - if the crime is motivated by someone's club in a undeniable religious group, race or sexual orientation, it is going to be punished the two.

Answer 6

I have nothing nice to say about pat robertson

Answer 7

If they repealed the hate-laws crimes for religion, whould Robertson oppose that? Of course. Why? He wants rights for himself and ZIP for anyone that disagrees with him. He is a hypocrite.

Answer 8

We should have the same laws for everyone. We don't need special hate-crime laws because what constitutes a hate crime is a subjective matter. Just enforce the ones already on the books more strongly.

Answer 9

Pat Robertson is not to nice of a guy, BUT, he is correct in this instance. We do not need anymore laws such as this. Enforce the laws we have.

Answer 10

Its called "Bashing Gay-Bashers".

Simply amazing isnt it?? "This law would make it a crime for a Christian to discriminate against gays - which happens to be our God given right!!"

Freakin idiot, Robertson is.