Christian author worries that hate crime legislation won't tolerate his intolerance.

Comparing President Obamas future singing of this bill as wielding the sword of Damocles author Donald James Parker laments the good old days of Christian persecution of people for sex and religion:

<snip>
Are you ready to go to jail for saying homosexuality is a sin? Are you willing to be sentenced to indoctrination school to learn about Islam if you say that following Mohammed is not the way to Heaven? And what happens with books which are already in print which make statements like this (my book Homeless Like Me is in this category)? Will they be banned? Will authors be prosecuted for something they said before it was against the law?
<snip>
The aim is definitely to remove the claws of Christianity.

The claws of Christianity? Not a name for even a bad punk act. What makes these people so afraid of seeing their own hatred instead of trying to justify it? Is it fear? Is it their willful ignorance towards everything except some obscure interpretation of a book written three to four thousand years ago? This is the root of the 'tea-baggers' and the Glen Beck worshipers.

Were the good old days of Christian persecution all that great for Christians? Ask the victims of good old fashion exorcisms practiced on those just being accused of demonic possession or having 'unclean spirits'. Even today this practice continues. The old teeshirt with the prayer 'Jesus, protect me from your people' rings ever louder as 'his people' gear up to oppose making hatred of others a thing of the past. In their own Bible, somewhere is written, I forget exactly where, 'The way of peace they do not know'.

That by not mandating their flavor of pseudo-Christian prayer, the government is suppressing their beliefs.

I wonder what these people would think if they ever actually read what their savior said with an open mind.

and crimes that do actual harm. Speech is still protected.

If this guy wants to argue the law, he should at least familiarize himself with the Constitution. Artcle I Section 9, in part says: No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Seriously who the fuck thinks this shit up?
What a tool.

and persecute based on his beliefs.

What I see and hear on the internet and in the "real world" is a vast difference between religion and churches. When one looks at religion it preaches love, compassion, tolerance, help for the needy and poor, and the things that we feel are the good things in life and ourselves. When churches get involved their have a tendency to corrupt this message. They tend to focus on converts and power. The power to influence others to their way of believing.

This country was based on morals, but not on god. This is where the god fanatics get it all wrong. I would venture a guess that more wars and people killed were the result of religious differences than any other reason. What does that really say about organized religion?? If one is going to promote religion then they should then have to state the basic tenets of their religion.

that's what Jesus had in mind.

Liberals aren't as scarey as you hoped? Tell everyone they are anyway! Pretend the gay agenda is out to castrate white males!

Learn how making shit up can work for you at home, at work and at school!

is almost as bad as living in the bible belt; their audacity amazes me. They accuse us of trying to rewrite the Constitution yet it's perfectly acceptable for them to try rewrite the frickin bible because they feel it's too liberal. Google "Conservative Bible Project". Now tell me folks, "WWJD?

as far as we know. Everything the Bible says about Jesus, and about what Jesus supposedly said, is hearsay.

:shrug:

The First Amendment is still there and you are free to spew as much disgusting bile as you wish. However, if you and your buddies decide to do a little "fag bashing" for sport, rest assured, the punishment will finally fit the crime.....;)

so he won't act on his hate.

Back when it was attempted under Bush. They used many of the same arguments that these religious nut jobs use: that it will make "thinking" a crime, that it will stifle free speech, etc.

Religion is not the cause of bigotry. Religion just ENABLES bigotry. Would the world be better off without religious bigots (or, indeed, without religion)? Sure. Unfortunately, that won't wipe out bigotry.

Seriously, they need to feel like the world is against them. If not then there is no fight and without a fight they can't rant and rave against "the world". Silly really but true.

the jokes on him, and he doesn't even know it... sad.

perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of any person"

To read this, as an assault on free speech or the free exercise of religion, requires a novel theory of the First Amendment: perhaps Donald James Parker's idea of saying "homosexuality is a sin" is beating somebody to death, or perhaps his idea of preaching the gospel is punching somebody in the nose?

It seems that hallucinations are not uncommon, even in our modern age. I read the bill and could not find books mentioned anywhere in it. The text is short, and it's not that hard to find: perhaps Mr. Parker should read it himself? He is free to hallucinate content if he so prefers, of course, but most of us will not regard his hallucinations as divinely inspired

while i agree he's overreacting, its kind of obvious that he's giving you a valid point. Regardless of the fact that his opinions aren't yours, you shouldn't be persecuted for it, unless your hurting someone else, voicing your beliefs isn't a crime, is protected.

You just can't go about targeting individuals for bodily harm and get away with it.

Also, "claws of Christianity" What the hell man.

:eyes:

did i say i'm against gay marriage? did i SAY i agree with everything he says? No. But telling us that someones stupid for what they say is no better than what Sean Hannity does. I'm all for gay rights, and i don't agree with what he says but we can't dismiss him as crazy because he's done nothing but disagree with what we think.

The bill will not impinge on Donald's right to spread hate by his statements, just makes sure that if people act on the hate he spews they can be prosecuted for it. Of course, adherence to the truth or reality may not be Donald's strength.

Then there is the theological problem that most people here have with people like Donald using Christianity as a vehicle to spread hate, but that is a whole different discussion best left to those who believe in religion.

hate crimes are not a crime on its own, all this bill does is let people sue someone twice. Murder is a crime, destruction of property is a crime, VANDALISM is a crime, logically you can already prosecute someone for a hate crime. Passing that bill is saying you can sue someone for handing out literature that's anti-homosexual or pro-white power. If you don't remember there was a case in Idaho about that. The Nazi's actually won that one.

"Walks like a duck . . . "

Nothing wrong with calling a duck a duck.

Shouldn't he have claws instead of hands? :evilgrin:

okay, THATS funny. By the way, i am a liberal. I'm not trying to say what you think is bad i'm just saying that you shouldn't continue to mention the claws of christianity. its a phrase, not saying its evil.

And nobody's ever threatened to prosecute or persecute me for saying that Islam is as big a pile of hooey as any other Abrahamic myth.

I don't think he grasps the different between fermenting hatred against Muslims or queers or whoever else and saying "While I respect your beliefs, I believe they're untrue because...".