Mark Kirk v. Lou Sheldon!
I really, really dislike Glenn Beck, but I got a kick out of the debate as part of tonight’s show (actually a rerun of May 3rd) between Traditional Values Coalition founder Lou Sheldon and my very own congressman, Mark Kirk (R-Illinois) about the recent passage of hate crime legislation to protect LGBT in the House. Kirk was among 171 co-sponsors. Sheldon has been ranting about this bill for awhile now, so I figured it was about time he got on CNN so everyone can hear him. I had no idea his voice was so high pitched and squeaky. Made me laugh.
Beck allowed Sheldon to explain his opposition. Sheldon gave the usual crap about it criminalizing Christianity by prosecuting Christians who read parts of the Bible condemning homosexuality. Problem is, the bill defines hate crimes as physically violent acts such as assault or murder, which is a pretty far cry from quoting a book. Did I forget to mention the language in the bill reaffirming that speech is constitutionally protected?
Mr. Kirk politely pointed out to Sheldon that any first year law student would tell him that the statute in the bill specifically applies to acts of physical violence, such as assault (weapon or without), or murder. Speech is neither. Yeah, I’m not even a law student. I feel smart.
But anyway, Sheldon would have none of it. He threw his arms up in the air and started rambling about some incident in Pennsylvania where people were arrested and charged with hate crimes for reading Bible passages and playing a bullhorn.
Update: CNN has a transcript.
KIRK: Americans now see across places like the Middle East sectarian violence that tears their whole country apart. And we think that the American people should be protected against that.
Our country stands for freedom and democracy, but also tolerance. And if the federal government can offer assistance to a local police department to make sure that a crime is rapidly followed up and that criminals are put in jail and that a national television spectacle doesn`t lead to riots in other places, then the American people are better protected.
BECK: I mean, I`ve got to tell you, I don`t agree with either of you guys.
(CROSSTALK)
BECK: Reverend, Reverend, Reverend, hang on. Isn`t the problem here that we`re trying to make different crimes mean different things? Look, I don`t care if you`re taking hormones to grow breasts or you have breasts naturally. I mean, I got big breasts, and I ain`t taking hormones, man. You beat me up because of my views, you beat me up because I`m taking hormones, you beat me up for whatever reason, you just want to beat somebody up today, you should get the same penalty, no matter what your intent was or your reason. Reason doesn`t make any difference to me. How is that not common sense?
SHELDON: Well, then you agree with me. Then you agree. That`s what I`m saying. You should not put these in special categories of special protected rights. And, furthermore, the lady was right on the phone when you had that call, that this will put a chilling effect. It lays the fundamental legal groundwork for there to be investigations, prosecution, and then persecution of those people that say in sermons or written out or radio or television about what the Bible says and what their religion believes concerning homosexuality.
BECK: Congressman, does it lay the groundwork?
KIRK: No. Any first-year law student would tell you that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the First Amendment gives the American people an unqualified right to free speech. What this bill simply does is it says that the state can request local backup from federal law enforcement if a crime is threatening to go out of control.
(CROSSTALK)
SHELDON: Until we use the White House, those 10 people in Philadelphia were arrested for a hate crime because they had a bullhorn that read the Bible about the book of Romans.
Leave a Reply