The Senate approved the measure 68-29 on Thursday after Democrats sneaked it into a “must-pass” $680 billion defense bill.

Most Republicans, although normally strong supporters of the U.S. military, opposed the bill.

"The inclusion of the controversial language of the hate crimes legislation, which is unrelated to our national defense, is deeply troubling," Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., told Fox News after the vote.

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said the move is a step toward criminalizing thought and suggested the bill will be a threat to those to speak out about their religious faith.

Many organizations have opposed the bill that will create federal protections and privileges for homosexuals and other alternative lifestyles but will deny those protections to other groups of citizens.

After the bill sailed through the House, the American Family Association alerted its constituents and created a procedure for them to send e-mails to Washington about the plan.

"In its never-ending quest to shred America's Judeo-Christian value system, the left is planning to hurriedly push through a 'thought crimes' bill," the alert said. "So-called 'hate crimes' laws are really laws that criminalize thought, because they punish an individual not for what he did but for what he thought. Politically incorrect thoughts about homosexual behavior will result in enhanced criminal sanctions under this law."

The AFA said, "Everywhere hate crimes laws have gone into effect, they have been quickly used to intimidate, silence and punish people of faith who express deeply held religious objections to the normalization of homosexuality.

"Such laws not only punish officially disapproved speech and thought, they create two tiers of victims. Under hate crimes laws, some victims get more protections than others, which violates the fundamental American principle of equality under the law," the alert said. "In fact, such laws actively discriminate against heterosexual Christians who are victims of crime, since they will get less legal protection than homosexual victims."

As pointed out by the American Family Association, "sexual orientation" is not defined in the law, therefore giving pedophiles, voyeurs, and exhibitionists special protections. Hence why the bill has been dubbed ''The Pedophile Protection Act.'"

Republicans attempted to add amendments stating "pedophilia is not protected as a sexual orientation," but House Democrats flatly refused.

In fact, Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., said all alternative sexual lifestyles should be protected.

"This bill addresses our resolve to end violence based on prejudice and to guarantee that all Americans regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability or all of these 'philias' and fetishes and 'isms' that were put forward need not live in fear because of who they are. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule," he said.

Also offering an online "contact Washington" process was the organization Pray in Jesus Name, founded by former U.S. Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt, who was involuntarily removed from the U.S. military after he prayed "in Jesus name."

His organization submitted via fax almost 400,000 petitions to Washington opposing the "hate crimes" law.

Also, a separate larger Fed Ex campaign to warn U.S. Senate members of the dangers of the "hate crimes" plan dispatched more than 705,000 letters to senators.

The letter-writing effort was organized by WorldNetDaily columnist Janet Porter, who also heads the Faith2Action Christian ministry. It allowed citizens to send individually addressed letters to all 100 senators over their own "signature" for only $10.95.

The bill also has a rather vague definition of "intimidation," so a Christian pastor's sermon could be considered 'hate speech" if heard by an individual who then acts aggressively against someone based on "sexual orientation."

Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, told WorldNetDaily the move is alarming because "this would be the very first governmental and societal disapproval of a sincerely held religious belief, held by a majority of Americans, namely that homosexual behavior is immoral.

"It's the first time the federal government is writing into law a disapproval of that belief," he said.

Although he said he doesn't believe there will be "immediate" prosecutions of pastors and churches for teaching the biblical injunction that homosexual behavior is sin, "I think the effect on speech and religious speech is nonetheless real."

He said he does expect that at some point, pastors will be called to testify in "hate crime" cases in court "as to what that pastor preaches, what the church teaches, what the Bible teaches."

"When this happens, there will be a shock wave through pastorates in America," he said.

Ultimately, he warned that the homosexual advocates who have pushed the "hate crimes" plan consider this law just the first step "toward silencing Christians."

That development already has been observed not only with the enactment of "hate crimes" laws in other nations but in the "hate crime" related speech codes existing on many university campuses in the U.S., Stanley said.  

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder did admit before the Senate Judiciary Committee that a homosexual activist who is attacked following a Christian minister's sermon about homosexuality would be protected by the proposed federal law, but a minister attacked by a homosexual wouldn't be.

"This is the question," said talk radio host, Rush Limbaugh on his July 3rd show, "(Sen.) Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) presents a hypothetical where a minister gives a sermon, quotes the Bible about homosexuality and is thereafter attacked … by a gay activist because of what the minister said about his religious beliefs and what Scripture says about homosexuality. Is the minister protected?"

Holder stated "Well, the statute would not – would not necessarily cover that. We're talking about crimes that have a historic basis. Groups who have been targeted for violence as a result of the color of their skin, their sexual orientation, that is what this statute tends – is designed to cover. We don't have the indication that the attack was motivated by a person's desire to strike at somebody who was in one of these protected groups. That would not be covered by the statute."

Continued Limbaugh, "In other words: ministers and whites are not covered by the hate crime statute because we're talking about crimes that have a historic basis, groups who have been targeted for violence as a result of their skin color, sexual orientation. So hate crimes are reserved exclusively for blacks and homosexuals. Everybody else can get to the back of the bus on this one."

The bill is now waiting on President Obama's signature, but there is a catch. Klingenschmitt pointed out that Obama may not like the proposal, since it is linked to funding for an engine for the F-35 fighter jet, which he has opposed.  

"If President Obama vetoes the F-35 second engine, as he promised when speaking in Phoenix last spring, he will ironically kill the homosexual agenda and their evil 'Pedophile Protection Act,'" he wrote.

Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, said, "The administration and the Democratic-led Congress are out of touch with the mainstream. They represent the most fringe extreme elements of America. They will not be able to continue their efforts to undermine moral values, socialize the economy and trash American pride and heritage. The people will not remain silent forever."

---

Users' Comments (12)

Add your comment

Posted by Mary, on 06-12-2009 19:28, Don't be sheep, this article is entirely misleading. With all due respect Debbi, you are the one being played. If I were a Christian I would be furious at how my religion was being used to push lies and spread hate.   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by Debbi, on 02-11-2009 22:55, As a mother of a daughter who was molested. If this bill  gives one child molester protection,then this is truly  a miscarriage of justice. If some one is murdered or  assaulted regardless of race,sex,sexual-orientation, or  religion they are already a victim! Let's use some common sense. Can't you people see we are all being played here!   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by Nick, on 28-10-2009 16:01, When it comes down to religious doctrine vs civil rights, there should be no hesitation in protecting civil rights first. Separation of church and state is important, as history has taught us time and time again.    When people think an "anti hate-crime" law interferes with their religion, maybe it's time to question the doctrine of that religion.   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by Annie, on 28-10-2009 15:06, This article prooves Christians will not hesitate to lie if it furthers their agenda. It is full of untruths and misleading statements. Perhaps you should READ the bill first.   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by Art, on 27-10-2009 15:29, OBAMA LOVES HATE BILL    Go ahead, Mr. President. Sign the "hate" bill. By doing so you will help to fulfill the predicted repeat of the "days of Lot" in Luke 17 - days which today seem anxious to outperform their ancient counterparts! You have already been helping to fulfill the predicted repeat of the "days of Noah" in the same chapter - that is, violence towards the unborn which presently is matching, if not surpassing, the violence that forced God in Genesis 6 to announce that He would soon destroy everyone except Noah and his family. Mr. President, by helping to fulfill both of the above "days" you will discover that God has His Almighty veto over what you say and do! [just caught the preceding on the web]   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by blueangel, on 26-10-2009 17:40, I don't see what the big deal is. you still have the freedom of speach but if you beat up some one who is GLBT,of another color,sex,religion you just get longer time.You can still spout crap but you just can't hit.    Also just because the majority wants it dosen't make it true.The majority of people in the 1920-70's still wanted blacks as slaves but did that make it right?   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... » See all 1 replie(s) Posted by Lynn Berntson, on 26-10-2009 16:03, Regarding the hate crime bill (tacked on the arms bill waiting for the president’s signature), what will happen when a pastor reads any of the many passages in the bible explicitly condemning the gay lifestyle? Will he/she be charged with a federal crime?    The Rasmussen survey holds some interesting problems with this bill.     Eighty-two percent of black Americans believe the Bible is literally true and the Word of God. Fifty-nine percent of white Americans share that view along with 71 percent of other, primarily Hispanic, Americans.     Any “face-value” reading of the Bible must admit that Leviticus 18:22 prohibits sexual intercourse between men. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” This is a direct commandment prohibiting homosexual unions. This passage clearly associates homosexuality with perversion, including committed, loving same-sex relationships.     Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions: for their women changed 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 unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due.         I realize the government doesn’t endorse or promote “biblical information” however the bill runs in contrast to the views of the majority of our citizens. I look forward to your response. Lynn Berntson in Jacksonville   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by n2dep2care, on 26-10-2009 15:32, You will be judged harshly for promoting nonsense like I have read in this post! Untruths/half-truths/lies! God forgive you!   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by DAN, on 26-10-2009 15:06, "The bill is now waiting on President Obama's signature, but there is a catch. Klingenschmitt pointed out that Obama may not like the proposal, since it is linked to funding for an engine for the F-35 fighter jet, which he has opposed."    Don't hold your breath on this. President Obama is planning on signing the new law Wednesday afternoon.   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by Nick, on 26-10-2009 14:10, 2) Next, the article says "In fact, such laws actively discriminate against heterosexual Christians who are victims of crime, since they will get less legal protection than homosexual victims."  This statement is also entirely false -- actually, a victim suffering bodily injury because of their heterosexuality and religion would be DOUBLY protected. Religion is an explicitly protected characteristic and "sexual orientation" includes heterosexuality. Also see § 4707 (affirming existing hate crimes law that hate crimes motivated by religion are protected)    3) Next, the article states ""sexual orientation" is not defined in the law, therefore giving pedophiles, voyeurs, and exhibitionists special protections."  Actually, sexual orientation has a very specific and commonly accepted meaning both in common-usage English and Psychology. It a person's attraction to the same or opposite sex person. Check any reputable dictionary.    Read it Http://thomas.loc.gov Search for S.1390   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by Nick, on 26-10-2009 14:08, I thought a few misleading portions of this article should be clarified:  1) The article repeats several times that hate crimes law will somehow censor speech or peoples thought. Or, that people could be charged for crimes merely by what they say. Both of these are patently false.  This law only applies when a person actually causes or attempts to cause bodily injury to another. Pure speech is never censored and and this law does not apply because someone speaks negatively about homosexuality (or race, religion, or other protected groups). See § 4707 of the Act.   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment... Posted by Chuck Anziulewicz, on 26-10-2009 13:26, First of all, Rush Limbaugh is full of crap when he says ministers and whites aren't covered by the hate crimes law. The law has covered the categories of religion and race for the past 40 years, that includes Christians and white folks. And NEVER over the past 40 years has someone been prosecuted for expressing prejudice against members of a race or a religious group. Christian pastors have been invoking Scripture against non-Christians for as long as there have been Christians, and the hate crimes statute has never been used against them.    But there is a BIG difference between expressing personal prejudice against a group, and being motivated by that prejudice to attack someone’s person or property. I don’t care if Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Sean Hannity or Lou Sheldon hurl their anti-Gay invective until the cows come home; but if someone uses Scripture as a justification for beating up someone who is Gay, that’s a different story.   » Report this comment to administrator » Reply to this comment...