How do you feel about the laws being passed against speaking out against homosexuality?

Question

In case you don't know much about those laws, they make it to where if you do so much as read out loud a passage of the Bible where homosexuality is mentioned in a negative aspect you can be arrested for commiting a crime of hate. This means that preachers can't preach the message that homosexuality is wrong. People can't voice their opinion if it happens to be that. Nothing can be published that states or suggests this.

I think that these laws are unconstitutional because they breach our amended rights (freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion). I also think that they are riduculous; just because a person doesn't agree with homosexuality doesn't mean that they hate gays and lesbians, and it tosses my beliefs into a category of actual hate and crimes against gay people.

I don't agree with the lifestyle, but I believe that we are all human beings who each deserve the same amount of respect, love and compassion no matter our differences.

So? Care to share?

I'll say this only once.

Preaching that homosexuality is a sin is not hate speach. God loves everybody equally, sinners included. The Bible (which is not at all a stupid, irrelevent 2,000 year old book) is very clear on that. It states that we must love all people equally and not judge them no matter what.

I think it's wrong to be gay. I don't hate gay people.

The Bible contains absolutely no hate.

I'm sorry if you can't see that, but one day you will know and confess that Jesus is Lord and you will reap what you have sewn.

http://newsblaze.com/story/20070505202020nnnn.nb/newsblaze/TO

Answer 1

The Matthew Shepard Act(Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007,H.R. 1592/S.1105

I wouldn't have a problem at all with this act if there wasn't a chance that it would be abused. But I believe,if it is not vetoed by the President, it will be used,sooner or later,against Christians to squash their free speech,and in essence become a reason for the "thought police" to incarcerate anyone who openly speaks against homosexuality. It has already happened in Sweden and Canada where pastors have stood trial for preaching homosexual behavior is a sin. How can anyone say that won't happen here in America?
We already have laws to protect ALL citizens of America.I don't see any reason for more,unless there is some underlying reason for it. I,for one,don't trust what that underlying reason may be.
Congressman Jeff Miller,at the following website,explains further why he thinks this Act would be bad for us.

http://newsblaze.com/story/20070505202020nnnn.nb/newsblaze/TO

Answer 2

You've received some bad information. There is no such law being passed to prevent anyone from reading the bible or saying whatever they want. It is true that there is a hate crime law that will hopefully be passed.

I'm glad you're open minded enough to say that you don't agree with the lifestyle, but that everyone deserves the same amount of respect. The truth is there will never be a law that prevents you from having your beliefs. Unfortunately there are people who do commit hate crimes against gay people every day. It happened to a friend of mine whose home was damaged by people who terrorized him for nights on end. That is why the hate crime law is needed - not for open minded people like you, but for people who take it too far and cause serious damage, whether that be physical or emotional/mental.

Answer 3

I'm not sure that's true about the law. Somebody else told me that was a piece of misinformation making the circuit of the internet. Do you have a link somewhere to the details of exactly what the law says?

Edited to add: Edited to add: I read that story you linked carefully. I don't think it actually says that preaching that homosexuality is wrong is a crime. Here's how I understand it: If a person assaults someone who they believe is gay and there is a reason for the court to think that they assaulted the person *because* they are gay, they could be charged with a hate crime. Some people are concerned that this is not fair because the crime shouldn't be considered more or less serious depending on who the victim is. (This, I actually agree with. Assault is wrong, period. It would hurt just as much if someone punched me because they thought I was trying to steal their boyfriend as it would if they punched me because they thought I was a lesbian.)

Some people are concerned that if a person has spoken against homosexuality, then they assault someone who happens to be gay, that their expressed opinions could be used against them in court as evidence that the assault was a hate crime. They are afraid that this might make people afraid to speak against homosexuality. However, if the person who speaks against homosexuality doesn't go on to commit a crime, then this will never come up in court.

Here's the actual text of the law: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1592
Note the following: "(d) Rule of Evidence- In a prosecution for an offense under this section, evidence of expression or associations of the defendant may not be introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless the evidence specifically relates to that offense. However, nothing in this section affects the rules of evidence governing impeachment of a witness." I take this to mean that even if Bob thinks homosexuality is a sin, his opinions on homosexuality would be considered irrelevant if he randomly happened to hit a gay guy in a bar brawl over a lost football game.

So really, all you have to do to avoid being convicted of a hate crime under that law is avoid assaulting anyone. That ought to be easy, eh?

Answer 4

Such laws would be unconstitutional. I've heard that there never was such a law passed, and that this whole thing about silencing preachers is just a load of bull. However, if you can provide a link to a word-for-word copy of such a piece of legislation or a specific case of someone being charged on these grounds, I'll believe you.

If what you're saying is true, how come Fred Phelps and his gang are still running all around the country spreading their hatred of homosexuals? If what you're saying is true, why isn't Fred Phelps in prison?

Answer 5

I think its stupid. Not because there stopping people saying stuff about homosexuality, because i do not have a problem with gay people. If your gay your gay if your not your not, we are all still humans. Even though i feel this way, you can't tell people what they can't say and what they can. This America, if someone disagrees with homosexuality they have the right to say they don't like it, it mean but that's how they feel.

When I heard about they may pass this law next year I thought it was dumb because if they start making laws about speaking out against homosexuality, the government will slowly try to start making laws about other things we can't say and slowly our freedom of speech will be taking away from us.

Seantae, this law has not been passes but many homosexual organizations are trying to get this law made. That's why some people don't want a democrat president because they think if we have one the law will be passed. I highly doubt if any type president will allow this law to be passed.

Answer 6

Please give an example of such a law. This is an issue the Chritian Right throws around a lot. In every case that I have seen, they are actually referring to laws that simply make regular crimes a hate crime if it is motivated by prejudice against sexual orientation. For example, hitting someone because they are black or gay is a hate crime and more heinous than hitting someone because he sings bad kareoke.

It does NOT say you can't verbally disagree with homosexuality.

Answer 7

The incident occured in Sweden, and there are no such laws in the USA.

I am not homophobic, racist or any other sort of hater.

I am against hate-speech and hate-crimes laws because they are unconstitutional. I would much rather have some idiot out in the open spewing hatred than considering themselves some sort of martyr by having to hide. It may increase violence, a blowback if you will.

Freedom of speech means supporting speech I loathe. That is the true test.

Answer 8

For as long as I have been watching our government, stupid people have enacted stupid unconstitutional laws that always do far more harm than good. Eventually, someone always takes such unjust laws to the Supreme Court and, so far, the US Constitution has always prevailed. I have no doubt preachers will continue to state their opinions as they always have, especially to their own congregations, and thus I advise folks to not get too excited about this. There will surely be multiple lawsuits filed and the issue (much like abortion) will never really be settled to everyone's satisfaction.

As an atheist, nothing would please me more than to see every copy of the Bible burned in a huge bonfire. Obviously, this will never happen and I've had to learn to live with the fact that I'm just never going to get my way. Christians need to learn to live with the fact that homosexuality is never going to disappear just because their imaginary friend has declared it an abomination. Christians can rant and rave to their heart's delight, but in a civilized society everyone has a perfect right to practice whatever form of sexuality they feel is most appropriate for themselves. Until it can be proved that God actually exists, that He can manifest Himself within objective reality, and that He actually cares about such trivia as human sexuality, Christians have no moral right to inflict their superstitious values on the rest of us. Modern human beings use civil and criminal law to manage their affairs and Christian outrage is just so much stinky hot air -- much like the stinky hot air coming from those who seek to limit our freedom of speech in the name of political correctness. I advise patience. The Courts will settle this issue, not irrate politicians, and certainly not outraged Christians.

Answer 9

I know I don't like it when people spread stupid rumors because they can't be bothered to take 5 seconds of their time to check the validity. Right on to the poster who gave you the Snopes link. Utilize it!

I also think 20 years from now, it probably will be a law. 50 years ago it was generally acceptable to use hate speech like that towards racial minorities. How do you feel about that? It's the same thing if you ask me.

Answer 10

I have two issue with this
1stly if you were told that you are an abomination, certainly sends me into a rage
2ndly freedom of speech, freedom of religion does not give anyone the right to impinge their beliefs and opinions upon others in our society
I believe you're taking this to a level that suites your own agenda