Author
|
Topic: Is the Bible hate literature? (Read 623 times) |
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.70
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
  
|
 |
Is the Bible hate literature?
« on: 2007-02-01 15:39:31 » |
 |
Is the Bible hate literature? by Randall Palmer
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?storyID=294006
22 May 2003 | 02:34 BST
OTTAWA (Reuters) - An attempt to broaden Canada's hate-crimes laws to
include protection for homosexuals has sparked a fierce debate in
Parliament over whether the Bible and the Koran could be branded as
hate literature.
It centres on a bill from gay Member of Parliament Svend Robinson that
would make it a crime, punishable by up to two years in prison, to
incite or promote hatred against homosexuals.
But his attempt to end gay-bashing has brought warnings that pastors
or imams could be thrown into jail for preaching homosexuality is evil
and that their scriptures could be banned or confiscated.
Robinson, a member of the minority New Democratic Party, dismissed the
fears as unfounded.
"There's not an attorney general in the country anywhere at any level
who would consent to the prosecution of an individual for quoting from
the Bible," he told a House of Commons committee examining the bill.
"An attorney general who tried something like that would be run out of
town on a rail."
Opponents of the bill point to the Owens court case in Saskatchewan
five months ago involving the right to quote the Bible in an newspaper
ad against homosexuality. The judge ruled that a Biblical passage in
Leviticus "exposes homosexuals to hatred."
Even though the Owens case dealt with human rights legislation,
critics said that sort of ruling could just as easily be applied in a
hate-crimes case under the criminal code.
"I'm concerned about the chilling effect of this kind of decision,"
said Vic Toews of the official opposition in Parliament, the Canadian
Alliance.
The gay-rights lobby group Egale suggested the courts would eventually
insist on including sexual orientation in the current hate-crimes
legislation, which prohibits hatred on the basis of colour, race,
religion or ethnic origin.
"I would suggest to this committee that the legislation as it stands,
by being under-inclusive, by failing to protect a group equally
needing protection, is unconstitutional," Egale's John Fisher said
this week.
He said gays were more likely to be attacked than heterosexuals.
Pat O'Brien, a legislator from the governing Liberal Party, recalled
an incident in which Robinson himself had confronted a Roman Catholic
priest on Parliament Hill who was protesting homosexuality, and
Robinson threw one of his signs over the embankment he was standing
on.
"I have concerns whether somebody like that is going to be able to
carry out his freedom of expression," O'Brien said.
Because Robinson's bill has prompted an avalanche of e-mails and
letters to members of Parliament, it has become hot potato that the
Liberals appear unsure how to handle.
Liberal Justice Minister Martin Cauchon told the House of Commons on
Thursday he supported the bill. But socially conservative members of
the Liberal Party were put on the committee on Wednesday when a motion
was made to shelve it.
Robinson successfully delayed that motion, and both sides are now
looking to a final committee battle on May 26 or 27 that is likely to
determine whether the bill will die or proceed to broader
consideration by Parliament.
|
|
|
|
|
Walter Watts
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 1571
Reputation: 8.53
Rate Walter Watts
Just when I thought I was out-they pull me back in
|
|
Re:Is the Bible hate literature?
« Reply #1 on: 2007-02-01 23:45:36 » |
|
Hate-crimes laws are a slippery slope IMHO.
From Wikipedia:
Arguments against hate crimes legislation
One major argument against the concept of hate crimes is that it criminalizes thought by increasing the penalty for crimes based on the motive for committing those crimes. The deliberation or premeditation that distinguishes, for example, first-degree murder from second-degree murder, may be held as an example that to a certain degree, thought is already criminalized. However, some argue that premeditation is concomitant with a premeditated crime. Motive, however, whether it be hate, jealousy, greed, or passion, is not part of a crime in the same manner. For example, individuals discussing their hatred of a social group with each other are not committing conspiracy, while those same individuals plotting to rob a bank are.
A further argument is that, from a utilitarian perspective, individual deterrence is unlikely to be achieved over an entrenched social conscience. Rather than deterring crime, the concept of hate crime may have the opposite effect of enraging individuals psychologically susceptible to developing anger and hatred to others amidst a domination complex.[citation needed]
The issue arises when a statute imposes additional sentencing criteria for a pre-existing offense for a guilty mind (mens rea). However, not every state form of statute is susceptible to this argument. In the Pennsylvania Code, a separate offense exists entitled "ethnic intimidation." The ethnic intimidation offense is a particular offense which requires both a specific form of criminal conduct and a particular state of mind (mens rea) at the time. There are offenses in criminal law, within both common law and civil law systems which do not require a separate mens rea including most public welfare (regulatory) offenses and homicide statutes based upon common law doctrinal Felony-Murder and Misdemeanor-Manslaughter rules [2].
Walter
|
Walter Watts
Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
No one gets to see the Wizard! Not nobody! Not no how!
|
|
|
|
Logged
