The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on January 10, 2019, 08:16:36 PM
-
In the Redundancy Department of Redundancy, DUmpmonkiez theorize evangelicals want to kill all teh gheys...
... Muslims do, but the DUmpmonkies luv teh Muslims... so it's ok...
Star Member Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (27,485 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211654172
Do Evangelical Activists Want to Legalize Gay Lynching?
On December 20th, the Justice for Victims of Lynching Act cleared the U.S. Senate in a rare unanimous vote after it was introduced by the chamber’s three African-American members — Sen. Kamala Harris (D-NY), Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) — introduced it earlier in 2018.
It means, bluntly, that if the bill passes, that lynching would be a federal crime. That’s right: Although lawmakers tried to address lynching at the federal level nearly 200 times in the first half of the 20th Century, it was never successful. So here we are in the 21st Century, still trying to fix what Rolling Stone‘s Jamil Smith called “the most sustained campaign of domestic terrorism outside of slavery’s holocaust” after visiting the National Memorial for Peace and Justice in Montgomery, Alabama last year.
While the most common symbol of lynching is a hanging, in fact it encompasses a wide variety of heinous acts: being shot repeatedly, burned alive, forced to jump off a bridge, dragged behind cars. Matthew Shepard’s murder in Wyoming in 1998 is the most infamous gay lynching of the past 20 years that spurred a movement to create stricter hate crime legislation and protections for LGBT people.
So it should be a no-brainer to add “lynching” to federal civil rights law. But since in addition to “race, color, religion, and national origin,” this bill would cover crimes motivated by hatred toward a person’s “gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability” — it has some evangelical activists in an uproar.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/lynching-bill-lgbt-evangelical-777303/
Lynching is a vigilante hanging. It's 1st Degree Murder- a felony, which is a federal crime when prosecuted under federal statutes:
Federal Civil Rights Statutes
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 249 - Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act
This statute makes it unlawful to willfully cause bodily injury—or attempting to do so with fire, firearm, or other dangerous weapon—when 1) the crime was committed because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin of any person, or 2) the crime was committed because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person and the crime affected interstate or foreign commerce or occurred within federal special maritime and territorial jurisdiction.
The law also provides funding and technical assistance to state, local, and tribal jurisdictions to help them to more effectively investigate, prosecute, and prevent hate crimes.
The law provides for a maximum 10–year prison term, unless death (or attempts to kill) results from the offense, or unless the offense includes kidnapping or attempted kidnapping, or aggravated sexual abuse or attempted aggravated sexual abuse. For offenses not resulting in death, there is a seven–year statute of limitations. For offenses resulting in death, there is no statute of limitations.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).
It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.
thus- it's already a federal crime... you don't need to make a new one.
Freethinker65 (5,565 posts)
2. Not really. They just do not want any specific protections given to anyone unlike themselves.
Intolerant and twisted thinking for sure. Most are not truly pro lynching, but they do not want the government to tell them who they can and cannot discriminate against. They feel it is their religious right to hate and to deny rights to anyone their religion (er...religious leaders) tells them to. Religious leaders need to use fear of others to stay in power and enrich themselves.
:whatever:
Thu Jan 10, 2019, 08:47 PM
Star Member msongs (48,780 posts)
3. really. it is what they really want. lynching and death camps. both would suffice for them nt
:whatever:
-
The DUmpBags are sub-stupid. Parasites that suck on any lifeblood they can for free. Too stupid to know they are stupid.
-
Well, as usual, the primitives are projecting.
<<<have closely watched the primitives project for eighteen years now.
It's the primitives who want to lynch people they don't like.
-
False Reporting on Lynching Bill Endangers Lives (https://lc.org/newsroom/details/011019-false-reporting-on-lynching-bill-endangers-lives)
ORLANDO, FL -- Some media have falsely reported that Liberty Counsel is opposed to banning lynching, or, opposes banning lynching of LGBT people. Such reporting is false, reckless, and offensive. In fact, Mat Staver said, “No one can or should oppose a bill that bans lynching.” Staver continued, “We oppose lynching across the board for any person. Period!”
“The bill in question created a list of protected categories, thus limiting the application of the law. Lynching should be prohibited no matter the person’s reason for committing this violent crime,” concluded Staver.
As an African-American, Jonathan Alexandre, Director of Public Policy for Liberty Counsel in Washington, D.C., is likewise outraged over the false narrative of the media. He said, “The systematic torture and abuse of African-Americans throughout history is this country’s greatest disgrace. Some politicians and media have tried to use this horrible history to push unrelated political agendas by hijacking a serious issue. Lynching is wrong for all people despite the reason for targeting a victim.”
Liberty Counsel has received death threats as a direct result of the false media narrative. One person, whose identity is being traced, said “All LC leaders must die.” The media and those with a political axe to grind must exercise caution when reporting or using social media. False reporting endangers lives.
The LGBTQUVWXYZ activists lied and at least some MSM folk shilled for them.
I think a repeat of the Family Research Counsel shooting (https://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/frc-shooter-sentenced-to-25-years-097069)* is the aim of these activists and their MSM shills.
* If one needed/wanted an example of W'pedia bias in political-social issues, they have one single sentence about this attempted mass shooting, in the Family Research Counsel. It's unimportant to them, so no article about the shooting, no article about the shooter, Floyd Corkins, just one sentence buried deep in the FRC article.
-
Most things uttered by the LGBT activists are out and out lies or huge distortions of truths. It is how they promote their agenda and game sympathy from the uninformed. Their goals are the destruction of any person or institution that speaks the truth about their intentions or anyone who disagrees with them.
-
In response to the title question, I'd say, that's like asking "Do cows say 'Moo'?"
Case in point:
" Religious leaders need to use fear of others to stay in power and enrich themselves."
1. Obviously, that's a total crock. Other than a couple nutjob fringe leaders, no religious leaders feel this way. They seek to provide spiritual guidance to their congregation, and help spread the Gospel and meet the needs of the world.
2. That's much more in line with what Democrat leaders do, especially as shown in the last few years. They use fear of white people, fear of cops, fear of conservatives, (As seen here) fear of Christians, fear of supposed "White supremacists" (Which they really just use as a code for anyone who disagrees with them on any issue), and so on in order to gin up votes and increase their own wealth and especially power. Finally, people are starting to wake up to this, especially as liberal pols are becoming increasingly nuttier and more radical (Just look at the Left's new golden child, AOC).
3. As I mentioned in the previous point, that whole DU thread involved exploiting the Left's fear of Christians. Pot, meet kettle.
-
Since we're discussing DU, stupid, and crimes maybe someone can explain hate crimes to me.
For instance...
Black man kills black man while saying "take that you black bastard": A crime. Might get a mention on the news. Might not.
White man kills black man while sating "take that you black bastard": A hate crime. 24/7 reporting. A sky-is-fallng end of the world event.
In the first scenario is the black guy less dead than in the second scenario? If the second scenario is a hate crime is the first scenario a love crime?
Wouldn't it be best and more productive to focus on the killing instead of the colors?
-
Since we're discussing DU, stupid, and crimes maybe someone can explain hate crimes to me.
For instance...
Black man kills black man while saying "take that you black bastard": A crime. Might get a mention on the news. Might not.
White man kills black man while sating "take that you black bastard": A hate crime. 24/7 reporting. A sky-is-fallng end of the world event.
In the first scenario is the black guy less dead than in the second scenario? If the second scenario is a hate crime is the first scenario a love crime?
Wouldn't it be best and more productive to focus on the killing instead of the colors?
That would require an iota of the least common commodity of all: Common Sense.
-
Ask a DUchebag if they think that muzzies have the religious right to throw homos off of buildings?
It would be like putting a DUchebag a round room and telling them there is a welfare check in the corner.
-
You can always count on the DUmpmonkies being hypocritical and Always pointing out the very things they too have done in the past only to not only blame the people on the right but to hide the fact they are not all that inclusive as they want you to think.
-
Are DUmpmonkiez stupid?
Yes. Next question please.
-
I thought it was the Democrats, dressed in their hooded crusader uniforms that made lynching an artform.
-
I thought it was the Democrats, dressed in their hooded crusader uniforms that made lynching an artform.
The 15th President of the United States was James Buchanan, a Democrat. He supported the Dred Scott decision.
Buchannan's Vice President was John C. Breckinridge. Breckinridge ran as a southern democrat against Lincoln for President 1860. At the beginning of the Civil War, He served in the US Senate but was kicked out when he accepted a commission in the CSA as a Brigadier General.
Breckinridge commanded confederate troops throughout the war his most notable battle was at New Market VA. In early 1865, he was appointed by Jefferson Davis to the post of Secretary of War for the Confederacy.
-
DUmpmonkiez are stupid.