Today two members of Congress and leaders of several Christian pro-family organizations are holding a press conference in Washington D.C. about a vote this week that could usher in a big chill on religious speech. I hope lots of media outlets cover it.  (Christian news outlets like the Christian Post and some Christian radio shows are reporting on it. I was on a panel last Friday on Point of View radio show and we spent a lot of time on the issue.  They also did a whole show on the subject earlier in the week.) But, I'm surprised there wasn't coverage on conservative radio or television of last week's two-day hearing in the House Judiciary Committee on H.R. 1913, The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. 

Passing this Hate Crimes legislation is a top priority for the gay lobby which has been trying for nearly 20 years to designate homosexuals as a special category of citizens deserving of special protections under the law.  Specifically, H.R. 1913 would provide for enhanced penalties for people committing crimes against gay, lesbian and transgendered people because of their perceived bias or "hatred" against these people.  Violent crime is already illegal.  Current federal hate crimes legislation covers race, ethnicity, and national origin...immutable characteristics. H.R.1913 adds sexual orientation and gender identity to the list.  Under this law, a victim who practices gay sex or who doesn't accept the gender he or she was born with, is deemed more worthy of protection than your grandmother or your little girl.

 The absurdity of this proposed legislation was highlighted at the hearing where lawmakers proposed amendment after amendment to try to add other classes of people to the list receiving this special protection.  Concerned Women for America sent out a list which includes the following:

• Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) introduced an amendment to extend the hate crimes provisions to senior citizens. This was voted down along party lines. One congressman, Bobby Scott (D-VA) argued, "Seniors are just attacked because they are vulnerable, not because there is a bias against them."
• Another congressman, Tom Rooney (R-FL), a former soldier, wanted to add members of the armed forces as a protected class of citizens. There was an argument about whether members of the military are ever attacked when they return from service (think Vietnam vets.) But, again, all Democrats voted against the amendment and it wa defeated.
• Rep Goodlatte tried to add pregnant women to the list. He pointed out that, "Pregnant women have been far more targeted by perpetrators than any class the proposed hate crimes bill covers." Again....defeated.
• Then, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) proposed an amendment adding anyone with an immutable characteristic. He wondered, "Why are we valuing sexuality as more important than veteran status or old age, for instance." This amendment also failed.
•  Rep King also offered an amendment that barred pedophiles from receiving special protection under the hate crimes bill. This was defeated on a party line vote. Openly lesbian Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) said the amendment was "unnecessary and inflammatory."

We should have learned from other western countries, like Canada, the U.K. and Sweden, that hate crimes laws are a precursor to hate speech laws.  Attorney Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Policy for Liberty Council, a legal religious rights organization, says of the effort to expand Hate Crimes legislation, "It represents a thinly veiled effort to ultimately silence - under penalty of law - morally , medically, and biblically based opposition to the homosexual lifestyle." Supporters of the bill insist it only covers violent crime. If that's so, then why were all speech protection amendments turned down?

 The free speech threat is real. This bill is a step towards regulating the speech of people who support Christian moral values and oppose homosexuality.  Other countries are "ahead" of us in passing hate crimes laws. Pastors have been jailed and prosecuted for preaching biblical truth regarding homosexual behavior.  Christian groups have become targets for hate crimes prosecution. Think we can do this better? Here at home, under Pennsylvania's hate crimes law which includes sexual orientation, eleven Philadelphia Christians were arrested and prosecuted for singing hymns and carrying signs at a gay "outfest." Their convictions could have meant lengthy prison terms.  Ultimately they were exonerated.  Financial supporters and vocal of California Proposition 8 have been targeted and harrassed in some pretty ugly ways since they won their battle to protect marriage.  Would those who favor traditional marriage, and say so, be subject to prosecution under a hate crimes regime?  You bet.

 Our congress is about to take us down a road that will result in making it illegal for the church to be the church.  If you care, you might want to ask your member of congress to oppose H.R. 1913.