Hate crime

From Conservapedia
(Redirected from Hate crimes)
Jump to: navigation, search
See also: Hate speech

A "hate crime" is a "criminal act motivated by another person's (usually the victim's) race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Also called a bias crime. Can be a crime committed against a person, property, or society."[1]

A hate crime is oftentimes a liberal invention to try to criminalize politically incorrect attitudes, by making some crimes "worse" than others based on the views of the person committing the crime. The goal of this rewriting of criminal law is to create special advantages for those promoting a homosexual lifestyle and other favored liberal groups. The ultimate goal may be to criminalize the Bible, or at least marginalize it.

Liberals will often demand prosecution as a "hate crime" whenever the victim was a member of a group politically favored by the liberal agenda, regardless of whether there was any evidence of actual hate for the group by the perpetrator. In practice, a hate crime is more likely to be alleged when the victim is a member of a group that mostly supports Democrats rather than a member of a group that mostly supports Republicans.

Sample hate crime law

As an example, consider New York Penal Law § 485.05[2] It provides:

1. A person commits a hate crime when he or she commits a specified offense and either:

(a) intentionally selects the person against whom the offense is committed or intended to be committed in whole or in substantial part because of a belief or perception regarding the race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age, disability or sexual orientation of a person, regardless of whether the belief or perception is correct, or

(b) intentionally commits the act or acts constituting the offense in whole or in substantial part because of a belief or perception regarding the race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age, disability or sexual orientation of a person, regardless of whether the belief or perception is correct.

The statute then lists other crimes any of which could be a necessary element of the hate crime. So, for example, if the accused meets all of the elements of  section 121.12 (strangulation in the second degree), and the prosecutor also proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime was committed because of the age of the victim, then higher penalties apply. The New York hate crime law uses 60 years of age as the cut off for defining an elderly victim.

Under the New York hate crime law, there is a detailed formula for determining how much higher the penalties should be. For a misdemeanor, it is one class higher than the underlying offense. For class B felonies, the hate crime must draw a minimum of six years of imprisonment, and for class A-1 felonies, the hate crime must draw a minimum of 20 years of imprisonment. In addition, the judge can order the person convicted of a hate crime to participate in a hate crime education program.

So, hate crime laws do not make illegal conduct that was previously legal. Rather they provide for higher penalties if the crime was proven to be hate motivated.

Real hate crimes

In very early January of 2017, an extremely horrific and disturbing racist hate crime occurred when four black teens brutally beat and tortured an 18-year-old mentally-disabled white teenager in Chicago. It was a horrific hate crime, and one of the many, many horrifying things they did was tell the person to curse Donald Trump and white people.[3][4] The accused were denied bail,[5] and were charged with hate crimes.[6]

The hate crime was one of many anti-Trump hate-crimes after the 2016 presidential election.[7]

Community volunteers had been working for years to restore the Old Ashburn Schoolhouse, which historically had been a one-room segregated school for blacks in Loudoun County, Virginia. On October 1, 2016, five teenagers spray-painted “white power,” swastikas, crude drawings and profanities on the exterior of the school.[8]

In June 2015, a shooter murdered nine prayer service attendees at the Emmanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina. The shooter was convicted on 33 federal hate crimes in December 2016.[9] The shooter, "a self-described white supremacist",[10] justified the shooting as a response to alleged black-on-white killing.[11]

Three men were convicted under the Shepard-Byrd Act of committing a hate crime in August 2011 against an African-American waiting at a bus stop.[12]

In 1978, University of Miami football players threw an orthodox Jewish employee of the campus Jewish ministry into Lake Osceola, a lake on the campus. The man was wearing a Jewish cap and was on his way to Friday night services. Although no hate crime statute was enacted at the time, the national controversy lead to the resignation of the football coach.[13]

Hoax hate crimes

A list of reported hoax hate crimes can be found at Fakehatecrimes.org.

It has happened where individuals, for various reasons, stage an alleged hate crime when none at all occurred. After the 2016 presidential election, several violent and disturbing anti-Trump attacks occurred throughout the nation against Trump supporters or supposed Trump supporters. Despite these attacks, liberals and leftists only focused on alleged attacks by Trump supporters against minorities and others (the false leftist narrative, although being blatantly false and one-sided, fits their manufactured narrative that Trump supporters are "racist" and "evil" and that leftists are "tolerant" and "forgiving"). It was found that despite the number of real anti-Trump attacks, several of the "pro-Trump" attacks were found to be hoaxes.[14][15]

History

The FBI has investigated hate crimes since World War I. However, the federal government stepped up its involvement after the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Both state and federal laws covered many hate crimes such as assault, menacing, and even manslaughter. Traditionally, FBI investigations of hate crimes were limited to crimes in which the perpetrators acted based on a bias against the victim’s race, color, religion, or national origin. In addition, FBI investigations were restricted to those wherein the victim was engaged in a federally protected activity.

Gradually, both state and federal hate crime statutes were enacted to impose higher penalties for hate crimes on defined classes than the just the underlying violation. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, authorized the FBI to investigate hate crimes without regard to federal activity. The 2009 law also expanded the scope of hate crimes to include those based on actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or gender.[16]

Hate crime statistics

Here are the hate crime statistics reported by the US Department of Justice for 2015.[17] It should be noted that the statistics are skewed because the states use different definitions of what constitutes a hate crime.[18]

Bias motivation  Incidents  Offenses  Victims1 Known
offenders 
2
Total 5,850 6,885 7,173 5,493
Single-Bias Incidents 5,818 6,837 7,121 5,475
Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry: 3,310 4,029 4,216 3,196
Anti-White 613 734 789 681
Anti-Black or African American 1,745 2,125 2,201 1,605
Anti-American Indian or Alaska Native 131 137 141 113
Anti-Asian 111 132 136 108
Anti-Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 4 6 6 3
Anti-Multiple Races, Group 113 138 160 83
Anti-Arab 37 47 48 35
Anti-Hispanic or Latino 299 379 392 325
Anti-Other Race/Ethnicity/Ancestry 257 331 343 243
Religion: 1,244 1,354 1,402 809
Anti-Jewish 664 695 731 387
Anti-Catholic 53 59 60 29
Anti-Protestant 37 47 48 18
Anti-Islamic (Muslim) 257 301 307 228
Anti-Other Religion 96 104 107 53
Anti-Multiple Religions, Group 51 57 58 30
Anti-Mormon 8 8 8 6
Anti-Jehovah's Witness 1 1 1 0
Anti-Eastern Orthodox (Russian, Greek, Other) 48 50 50 36
Anti-Other Christian 15 18 18 15
Anti-Buddhist 1 1 1 1
Anti-Hindu 5 5 5 2
Anti-Sikh 6 6 6 4
Anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc. 2 2 2 0
Sexual Orientation: 1,053 1,219 1,263 1,221
Anti-Gay (Male) 664 758 786 803
Anti-Lesbian 136 168 170 142
Anti-Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender (Mixed Group)  203 235 248 218
Anti-Heterosexual 19 23 24 19
Anti-Bisexual 31 35 35 39
Disability: 74 88 88 73
Anti-Physical 43 52 52 40
Anti-Mental 31 36 36 33
Gender: 23 29 30 19
Anti-Male 7 8 8 6
Anti-Female 16 21 22 13
Gender Identity: 114 118 122 157
Anti-Transgender 73 75 76 114
Anti-Gender Non-Conforming 41 43 46 43
Multiple-Bias Incidents3 32 48 52 18

Hate crimes in the United States against atheists/agnostics are very low in number

According to a 2007 Pew Forum survey, about 4% of Americans are atheists/agnostics.[19] A 2008 Gallup poll showed that 6% of the U.S. population believed that no god or universal spirit exists.[20]

According to 2013 FBI statistics, 6/10 of a percent of hates crimes were against atheists/agnostics.[21][22]

Offender statistics

The FBI hate-crime statistics show that African-Americans commit a disproportionately large share of reported hate crimes.[23] In 2015, race was reported for 5,493 known hate crime offenders. Of these offenders:

  • 48.4 percent were White.
  • 24.3 percent were Black or African American.
  • 9.1 percent were groups made up of individuals of various races (group of multiple races).
  • 1.0 percent (53 offenders) were Asian.
  • 0.9 percent (52 offenders) were American Indian or Alaska Native.
  • 0.1 percent (4 offenders) were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.
  • 16.2 percent were unknown.[24]

Young people committed a disproportionally high number of hate crimes. Age was reported for 3,331 known hate crime offenders in 2015. Of these:

  • 84.7 percent were age 18 and over.
  • 15.3 percent were under age 18.[24]

Free speech and the Homosexual Agenda

Liberals seek to amend hate crime legislation to include sexual orientation and/or gender preference to legitimize certain lifestyles by declaring them to be protected by law, and to chill free speech that criticizes those lifestyles. Their reasoning is that if someone makes hateful statements and later commits a crime targeting a member of the group that was discussed, then the person would be subject to a higher penalty than if he had kept his thoughts unvoiced. So, criminals will feel less free to speak their minds. However, people who are sufficiently filled with hate to engage in violence against the target of their hate, are probably not going to have their speech curtailed in response to such legislation.

Opponents charge that hate crime and hate speech rules amount to an erosion of First Amendment guarantees of freedom of religion, free speech, and freedom of press. In particular, they object to rules or laws which equate condemnation of sin with prejudice. Proponents claim that the law should consider that hate crime harm society as a whole more than just random violence, thereby justifying a higher penalty.

Hate crime legislation imposes additional punishment for crimes held to be motivated by such "prejudice" without making "hate speech" a separate crime.

Some critics claim that hate crime legislation is a stepping stone for a lifestyle to become protected under anti-discrimination laws. However, many states have enacted hate crime statutes without then taking the separate step of amending anti-discrimination laws.

A ladder to legislate social acceptance and promotion of a lifestyle would be as follows:

  • Bottom Rung: hate crime legislation to recognize and accept the lifestyle.
  • Middle Rung: anti-discrimination legislation to favor and promote the lifestyle.
  • Top Rung: affirmative action to fully promote the lifestyle. [citation needed]

Additionally, some have argued that hate crime laws should be applied in extreme cases, but that existing legislation is far too broad. For instance, they argue that merely telling a homosexual that he will go to hell if he does not repent should not be a "hate crime", but that actually killing that person (which in the opinion of the murderer, would send them to hell) should be classified as a "hate crime". This is generally seen as a more moderately conservative to centrist view on the issue, and is the approach taken in the hate crime laws that have been enacted.

Claims of Hate Crimes

It is claimed that about 1100 hate crimes against homosexuals or their property occurred in 2004.[25][26] But most of those offenses occurred against property rather than individuals, often the result of drugs or alcohol. Only a tiny percentage even involved aggravated assault or worse, and those classifications are not based on any proof at trial.[citation needed] 74% of hate crimes are either crimes against property (e.g., theft, vandalism or graffiti) or the vague term "intimidation".[27]

The world-renowned pathologist Dr. William Eckert wrote regarding homosexual homocides the following:

Equally high is the number of homicides, many probably related to transient attachments, which often lead to suspicion, jealousy, and murder. When murder does occur it is exceptionally brutal with an overkill appearance... Overkill, as it is seen in homosexual and lesbian murders, is certainly a form of sadistic crime. In these instances multiple stabbing and other brutal injuries...are common findings...[28]
The First Baptist Church in Gravois Mills was vandalized and threatened by homosexual activists and received obscene phone calls. An FBI agent refused to list the incident as a hate crime.

However, Dallas Drake, President of the American Society of Criminology claims that homophobia is the general cause of these murders.[29]

Some feel national statistics regarding homosexuals committing hate crimes against heterosexuals may be underreported. For example, the First Baptist Church in Gravois Mills was vandalized and threatened by homosexual activists and received obscene phone calls. An FBI agent refused to list the incident as a hate crime. The incident involved an anti-homosexuality Bible verse on the church's sign.[30]

The Center for Reclaiming America cited the following account of how a hate crime statute was egregiously applied to an ex-homosexual:

In Madison, Wisconsin, a recovered homosexual who had left the “gay” lifestyle to start a family got into a heated discussion with an open homosexual about homosexuality at a gas station. The ex-“gay” man, David Ott, was holding his child in his arms during the entire incident, and neither man touched the other. The homosexual activist later told police he had felt threatened by Ott, and local prosecutors charged the man with “disorderly conduct” with a “hate crimes” enhancement.

The “hate crime” aspect, stemming from Ott’s belief that homosexuality is morally wrong, raised the potential fine from $1,000 to $10,000, and jail time went up from a possible 90 days to one year. Fearing the possibility of substantial jail time, Ott settled, and received 50 hours of community service plus a mandatory attendance at “tolerance” sessions conducted by lesbians at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. A ground rule for the session was the premise that homosexual behavior is not immoral.

The entire process cost Ott almost $7,000 in legal fees.[31]

Another example of an alleged anti-homosexual "hate crime" occurred at Columbia University in 2005, when two drunken students scrawled racist and anti-homosexual symbols on a dormitory wall. Initially charged with crimes carrying possible 4-year jail sentences, the charges were later dropped in exchange for some sensitivity training.[32] "I am pretty sure [the perpetrator] thought he was playing a joke," said one dormitory resident about the incident.[33]

There are very few anti-homosexual murders. The most publicized of an alleged incident, the murder of Matthew Shepard, was the result of drug deal gone wrong. After the defense attorney failed to win sympathy from the jury with an argument of self-defense against homosexual advances, the lead killer admitted in jail the killing was entirely motivated by money over a drug dealing debt;:[34]

Asked [by ABC News] directly whether [the lead killer] targeted and attacked Shepard because he was gay, McKinney told Vargas, "No. I did not. ... I would say it wasn't a hate crime. All I wanted to do was beat him up and rob him."
But if the attackers were just trying to rob someone to get a drug fix, why did they beat Shepard so savagely?
Prosecutor Rerucha attributes McKinney's rage and his savage beating of Shepard to his drug abuse. "The methamphetamine just fueled to this point where there was no control. It was a horrible, horrible, horrible murder. It was a murder that was once again driven by drugs," Rerucha said.
Dr. Rick Rawson, a professor at UCLA who has studied the link between methamphetamine and violence, tells "20/20" the drug can trigger episodes of violent behavior.
"In the first weeks after you've stopped using it, the kinds of triggers that can set off an episode are completely unpredictable. It can be: you say a word with the wrong inflection, you touch someone on the shoulder. It's completely unpredictable as to what will set somebody off" Rawson said.
"If Aaron McKinney had not become involved with methamphetamine, Matthew Shepard would be alive today," Rerucha said.

So what was the basis for the claim that this was a hate crime? Rather than admit to drug dealing the accused took their chances with the hate crime enhancement, and Shepard was portrayed as gay rather than as a drug addict who owed Aaron McKinney money. According to ABC News, "Prosecutor Rerucha recalls that Shepard's friends ... contacted his office. Rerucha told '20/20,' "They were calling the County Attorney's office, they were calling the media and indicating Matthew Shepard is gay and we don't want the fact that he is gay to go unnoticed."[35]

Conversely, threats and vandalism by homosexual activists are typically not treated as hate crimes. For example, "The Federal Bureau of Investigation has refused to investigate threats made by homosexual activists against a Missouri Baptist Convention church in the Lake of the Ozarks area."[30]

Criminalizing the Gospel, Christianity, and religious liberty

See also: Religious freedom and Christian persecution

Hate crime laws currently and officially do not criminalize speech or preaching the Gospel. Rather these laws impose higher penalties when interactions shift from speech to violence. Hate crime laws cover violence that targets people because of their religion. So, if someone preaching in public is physically attacked, the hate crime statute could be used to impose higher penalties.

Despite what the laws officially say, observers have seen an increased intolerance towards biblical Christians, whose views—while being completely legitimate and sincere—are leaving the cultural mainstream because of the leftward, secular, and anti-Christian drift of American culture.

For example, in a government report released in 2016, Martin R. Castro, the chairman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, stated that "The phrases “religious liberty” and “religious freedom” will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance."[36][37][38][39]

In 2014, the mayor of Houston, a leftist and the first openly-homosexual mayor of the city, briefly issued subpoenas on pastors, ordering them to turn over sermons concerning homosexuality.[40][41][42]

A pastor in Northern Ireland was charged and tried for making comments in one of his sermons against Islam that were considered "grossly offensive." Although he was found not guilty, he should have never been tried in the first place, as Christians should be able to freely express and advocate their biblically-based theological positions.[43]

Art Moore posted this at WorldNet Daily:

"We don't want to promote hatred against anyone and are opposed to violence for whatever reason," said Bruce Clemenger, head of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada's Centre for Faith and Public Life. "Our concern, though is that ... courts have not distinguished between the identity of the person and the activity. So sexual orientation refers to both the sexual disposition as well as the activity."

But homosexual activists contend such a distinction cannot be made with homosexuals any more than it can with matters of race or ethnic origin.

"The argument of separating the person from the behavior is their concept," insisted Kim Vance, president of Ottawa-based EGALE, Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere.

"In reality they are the same thing," Vance said in a WND interview. "That's language that they use to justify [opposition], but it's language that we don't agree with." [44]

What this means is that everyone is free to preach and believe their view of the Bible. However, if a person or group engages in violence to target another because of his religion, the crime will carry a higher penalty than would be the case if the victim was chosen randomly. Again, the hate crime statutes apply equally to victims based on religion and (in some states) on sexual orientation.

Other hate crime statutes

The Federal hate crime law is 18 U.S. Code § 249.[45] It covers "bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person".

The California "Hate Crimes" Laws are codified at Penal Code sections 422.55, 422.6, 422.7, and 422.75.[46]

DC has the Bias-Related Crime Act of 1989 (D.C. Official Code § 22-3700 et. seq.) which requires the crime to demonstrate "prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibility, homelessness, physical disability, matriculation, or political affiliation of a victim of the subject designated act."[47]

As of 2013, fifteen states have hate crime laws that do not include sexual orientation or gender identity.[48] Indiana has no hate crime law, but it does collect hate crime data.[48]

Virginia's law does not include disability, sexual orientation or gender identity. On January 13, 2017, Democratic Attorney General Mark Herring announced that he would propose an amendment to include those groups. However, both chambers of the General Assembly is controlled by Republicans making enactment doubtful.[49]

Objectivism, libertarianism, and "Hate crimes"

Objectivists and libertarians argue against the notion of hate crimes for minorities in general, saying that the only "true" minority is the smallest possible one, the individual. Therefore, killing any individual is a crime against a "minority" - the victim. Additionally, libertarians argue that it is wrong to punish an individual solely for a belief that led him to kill somebody. In other words, although libertarians feel it is wrong to murder someone because they are black, homosexual, or any other claimed minority, it is also equally wrong to murder someone because they are wearing a hat. However, even the most liberal individuals do not claim that the latter should be a hate crime, unless wearing that particular type of hat is a religious practice.

See also

References

  1. Hate crime. Cornell Law School. Retrieved on January 7, 2017.
  2. Hate crimes. findlaw.com. Retrieved on January 7, 2017.
  3. 4 charged with hate crimes in kidnap, torture of mentally disabled man. WND. January 4, 2017. Retrieved January 6, 2017.
  4. Hate crime charges filed in Chicago beating streamed on Facebook Live. Fox News. January 5, 2017. Retrieved January 6, 2017.
  5. Pathieu, Diane; Hope, Leah (January 6 2017). Judge denies bail for 4 Chicago Facebook Live torture suspects. ABC 7. Retrieved January 6, 2017.
  6. "Four Chicago Suspects Are Charged with Hate Crime in Facebook Live Attack of Special Needs Student", January 5, 2017. Retrieved on January 14, 2017. 
  7. Facebook Live attack the latest in string of anti-Trump assaults. Fox News. January 5, 2017. Retrieved January 6, 2017.
  8. "5 teens identified as suspects in historic Va. schoolhouse vandalism", WTOP, October 5, 2016. Retrieved on January 7, 2017. 
  9. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/12/15/505723552/jury-finds-dylann-roof-guilty-in-s-c-church-shooting
  10. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/12/28/dylann-roof-hearing/95915094/
  11. https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/dylan-roof-confesses-to-church-massacre-in-2015-police-video/2016/12/10/19b12a3c-bf31-11e6-ae79-bec72d34f8c9_video.html
  12. https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2014/04/30/cannonopinion.pdf
  13. Feldman, Bruce (2004). Cane Mutiny: How the Miami Hurricanes Overturned the Football Establishment. New York: New American Library, 17–18. ISBN 0-451-21297-5. 
  14. Facebook Live attack the latest in string of anti-Trump assaults. Fox News. January 5, 2017. Retrieved January 8, 2017.
  15. Huston, Warner Todd (May 5, 2017). Another Hate Crime Hoax: Church Organist Admits He Vandalized His Own Church with Trump and Nazi Slogans. Breitbart News. Retrieved May 5, 2017.
  16. Hate Crimes. Retrieved on January 9, 2017.
  17. https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2015/tables-and-data-declarations/1tabledatadecpdf
  18. Chiaramonte, Perry (May 24, 2017). Hate crime criteria vary widely by state, making analysis of such offenses difficult. Fox News. Retrieved May 24, 2017.
  19. Pew Forum Religious Landscape Survey - Key findings
  20. Belief in God Far Lower in Western U.S. Gallup.com. Retrieved on 2012-02-05.
  21. 2013 FBI hate crime statistics
  22. Atheism: The Next Civil Rights movement, Vlad Chituc, The Daily Beast, 4-6-2015
  23. The politicization of hate crime legislation
  24. 24.0 24.1 Offenders. fbi.gov. Retrieved on january 11, 2017.
  25. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States 2004
  26. FBI, Crime in the United States 2004, Table 4 Offense Type by Bias Motivation
  27. FBI, Crime in the United States 2004 Table 2.33 Incidents, Offenses, Victims, and Known Offenders by Offense Type
  28. Tedeschi CG, Eckert W, Tedeschi LG, eds. Forensic medicine; vol 2. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1977:962
  29. http://www.citypages.com/2009-04-08/news/rommal-bennett-s-trial-revisits-spate-of-gay-murders-in-the-twin-cities/2
  30. 30.0 30.1 Pastor finds FBI unresponsive to homosexual activists' threats, Bob Baysinger, Baptist Press, Nov 13, 2003.
  31. http://test.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/fastfacts/HateCrimes2.pdf
  32. Ruggles Vandalism Case Dismissed, Elizabeth Kraushar and Eleazar David Meléndez, Columbia Spectator, 6/12/06.
  33. Hate Crime Rocks Columbia’s Campus, Noah S. Bloom, The Harvard Crimson, December 13, 2005.
  34. New Details Emerge in Matthew Shepard Murder, 20/20, ABC News. Retrieved 22 July 2007.
  35. Id.
  36. Showalter, Brandon. "Religious Freedom Is 'Code Word' for Bigotry, Christian Supremacy, US Civil Rights Commissioner Says", The Christian Post, Setpember 9, 2016. Retrieved on January 9, 2017. 
  37. Kellner, Mark A. (September 8, 2016). ‘Religious freedom,’ ‘liberty’ just ‘code words’ for intolerance, U.S. Civil Rights chairman says. The Washington Times. Retrieved January 9, 2017.
  38. Chairman of U.S. Commission on Civil Rights calls the phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, and Christian supremacy. Religion News Service. September 8, 2016. Retrieved January 9, 2017.
  39. Carter, Joe (September 13, 2016). U.S. Civil Rights Commission: ‘Religious Freedom’ Is Code Word for Racism, Homophobia, and ‘Christian Supremacy’. The Gospel Coalition. Retrieved January 9, 2017.
  40. Starnes, Todd (October 14, 2014). City of Houston demands pastors turn over sermons. Fox News. Retrieved January 9, 2017.
  41. Starnes, Todd (October 29, 2014). Houston mayor drops bid to subpoena pastors' sermons. Fox News. Retrieved January 9, 2017.
  42. Hallowell, Billy (August 3, 2015). Houston Gov’t Subpoenaed Pastors’ Sermons. Now, They’re Fighting Back. The Blaze. Retrieved January 9, 2017.
  43. Turpin, Simon (January 8, 2016). Northern Ireland Pastor Not Guilty of Criticising Islam. Answers in Genesis. Retrieved January 9, 2017.
  44. The Bible as 'hate literature'?, By Art Moore, WorldNetDaily.com, October 21, 2002.
  45. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/249
  46. http://www.shouselaw.com/hate-crime.html
  47. Hate Crimes FAQs. Retrieved on January 11, 2017.
  48. 48.0 48.1 http://www.thetaskforce.org/static_html/downloads/reports/issue_maps/hate_crimes_06_13_new.pdf
  49. Clark, Mary Lee. "Attorney General seeks to expand hate crime definition", Capitol News Service, January 13, 2017. Retrieved on January 14, 2017. 

External links