H.R. 2015 Would Force a Gender Confusion Revolution on U.S. Businesses

By Peter LaBarbera

For once we agreed with Barney Frank (sort of), at least before he sold out to the “transgender” lobby. 

“There are workplace situations — communal showers, for example — when the demands of the transgender community fly in the face of conventional norms and therefore would not pass in any Congress. I’ve talked with transgender activists and what they want — and what we will be forced to defend — is for people with penises who identify as women to be able to shower with other women.”

—Homosexual Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), BEFORE he changed his mind and embraced including “transgenders” in the Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA)  

“Technically, you cannot truly change one’s sex. That’s why the procedure is not really called ‘sex change surgery’ but ‘sex reassignment surgery.’ The idea is to alter the physical appearance of a person’s anatomy to approximate as nearly as possible the anatomic arrangement of the other sex.”

— Melanie, “Sex Reassignment Surgery (SRS), the Nuts & Bolts,” a “Transgender Support Site” 

*          *          *

Employment NonDiscrimination Act (H.R. 2015) Language: 

“EMPLOYER PRACTICES.—It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer—

(1) “to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of the individual, because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity; or

(2) “to limit, segregate, or classify the employees or applicants for employment of the employer in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment or otherwise adversely affect the status of the individual as an employee, because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.”

*          *         *

TAKE ACTION:  Call the Congress (202-224-3121) or use e-mail to urge your Representative and Senators to reject ENDA (H.R. 2015) and the insanity of forcing business across the nation to accommodate and subsidize gender confusion in the name of “civil rights.” Also, call President Bush (202-456-1414) or e-mail him at comments@whitehouse.gov to urge him to veto the “trans”-affirming ENDA, along with the “Hate Crimes” bill (H.R. 1592) that his aides have indicated will likely be vetoed. 

Fast on the heels of the “Hate Crimes” bill (H.R. 1597, recently passed by the House) is the second of two top homosexual activist priorities: ENDA, the “Employment Nondiscrimination Act,” H.R. 2015, recently introduced by homosexual Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). Please read at the bottom of this story the homosexual newspaper Washington Blade’s analysis of the “transgender” provision of this radical bill.

To read about ENDA’s dubious “religious exemption” provision, click HERE.

Veteran observers of the “gay” movement will recall that Frank himself once strongly criticized the idea of including transsexuals in the ENDA bill (see above quote). But like most “progressives,” Frank has seen the light, or maybe he just heard the shouts — from radical “trans” activists who have skillfully adapted militant “gay” tactics to their own misguided cause, including calling their outspoken critics “transphobes.”

Several giant corporations have already settled on pro-“transgender” bathroom and dress policies — probably the same companies who would subject their employees to biased, pro-homosexual “diversity” lectures — but can you imagine inflicting these “transgender” regulations on small and mid-level companies through federal law via ENDA?

This is one of the most perverse applications of “civil rights” to date — and it’s headed straight for your business if you have 15 or more employees. What female employee wants to share the company restroom with a big-boned man claiming to be “transitioning” to “womanhood”? Will companies have to build “transgender male” and “transgender female” restrooms (or “Designated GLBT Restrooms”) to accommodate the various “orientations” and avoid government prosecution?

 

Churches and religious-oriented groups are quasi-exempt under ENDA but secular businesses owned by Christians or religious Americans are not. ENDA is a “gay” and “trans” lawyer’s dream. What about jobs such as a teacher in which the employer might not want the “transitioning” employee to model his newfound “gender identity” to children? Or service jobs (say a maitre d’) in which the employer may not want the newly “gender variant” employee to be in such a public role?

Imagine a male employee, John, who since he became employed at XYZ Corp., about a decade ago, has used the men’s restroom. Then one day he informs his boss that in a week he will come to work in a dress as “Joanna” and begin his MTF (“male-to-female”) metamorphosis into “womanhood.” (According to widely accepted regulations within the “transgender” world, he must “live” full-time as Joanna, taking female hormones, for a full year before he becomes eligible for “sex-reassignment surgery,” which will turn his healthy sex organ into a makeshift female sex organ. If you have the stomach to read what is actually done to a man’s body in “sex reassignment surgery,” click HERE, but be warned: it’s horrifying stuff. We must pray for these poor souls who are so confused that they would destroy their healthy, God-given bodies to assuage their inner conflict.)

Isn’t it a bit much to expect of normal, female XYZ employees to all of the sudden welcome “Joanna’s” presence in the ladies’ restroom? In fact, as I read the Blade account below, under ENDA’s proposed regulations, John/Joanna would be able to use the female restroom BEFORE his “sex reassignment” surgery. Indeed, the website “e-transgender,” quoting the homosexual/transgender group Human Rights Campaign, advises corporate human resources managers as follows:

“Employers should grant restroom access according to an employee’s full-time gender presentation.”

Read: if John “lives” (identifies) as Joanna full-time, he should be able to use the female restroom. Biologically-born ladies, beware!

What about the privacy rights of John’s female co-workers? Don’t they have the right not to feel personally invaded as they go to the restroom at their job? Will businesses have to put out new bathroom policies and undergo company-wide bathroom-usage training to explain the new policies?

 

But the situation becomes a crisis when the federal government — aided by politically correct activist judges — forces businesses to advance this Gender Confusion Revolution in the name of “civil rights.”

Is this really an area in which the federal government should even be involved? It’s bad enough that big business is rolling over to the bizarre “T” (Transgender) agenda — with some even subsidizing horrifying “sex-reassignment surgeries” that destroy men’s and women’s healthy bodies. (I once attended a conference for FTM (“female to male”) “transgenders” in which young women proudly showed off their flat chests — the result of “chest surgery” operations in which their healthy breasts were removed to make them look like the “men” they wanted to be.)

Of course, the larger goal here — shared by the “gay” and “transgender” lobbies — is to change your mind and heart regarding gender-confused conduct. The law is merely a tool in their never-ending quest to overturn America’s Judeo-Christian norms regarding family, sex and marriage.

We predict that businesses will deal with this very sad and strange “transgender” issue by building special restrooms and/or shower facilities for their “transgender” or alternatively “gendered” employees — spending countless millions to subsidize mentally disordered, deviant behavior. (Gender Identity Disorder, or GID, is a recognized mental disorder.) This corporate spending would accelerate dramatically should ENDA become law, as businesses would fear lawsuits if they failed to honor “trans” rights.

Call Congress (202-224-3121) or use e-mail to urge your U.S. Representative and Senators to reject ENDA, H.R. 2015. Also, call President Bush (202-456-1414) or e-mail him at comments@whitehouse.gov and ask him to veto the pro-“trans” ENDA, along with the “Hate Crimes” bill (H.R. 1592) that his aides have already indicated will likely be vetoed.

Ex-‘Gay’ Christian Singer Dennis Jernigan

In response to the recently proposed Hate Crimes Bill (H.R. 1592) currently before Congress, singer/songwriter/author and former homosexual, Dennis Jernigan, fears his right to openly talk about how he was able to overcome homosexuality would be compromised since H.R. 1592 seeks to prosecute criminals based on their thoughts.  “I was able to come to a level of freedom the homosexual community never told me was possible,” says Jernigan. “Yet, through faith in God, I successfully walked out of that way of thinking and have met thousands of other men and women who have done the same. What about our civil liberties? To pass such a bill as H.R. 1592 is to invoke fear that I could be prosecuted for my religious beliefs and speech.”
 
Jernigan goes on to say that he fears for his nine children and their families in the days ahead should such legislation pass. “To lose one of our most basic rights, that of free speech, is to strip away what it means to be an American. Homosexuals already enjoy the same rights as all other Americans when it concerns the punishment of criminal acts against them. This legislation seeks to bestow special treatment upon a very small portion of our society. If this bill passes, Congress is telling me that I and countless others who have discovered they don’t have to be homosexual are of less value now than when we were living as homosexuals.  If we look down the road of this slippery slope, this legislation would actually pave the way to make it a criminal offense to think differently than someone else or to have religious convictions that are opposed to this politically correct ideology.  Do we really want such thoughts to be illegal?

“I strongly support President Bush’s expected veto of this bill, and I implore the Congress to take a stand for what’s right and protect my freedom to not be homosexual – as well as my freedom to be able to talk about it openly.”
 
Dennis Jernigan is a husband and father who has been out of the homosexual lifestyle for over 25 years. His new CD entitled I CRY HOLY will be released nationwide in mid-July.  In a music career that extends over two decades, Jernigan has amassed dozens of hit songs to his credit, recorded over 30 projects, and written five books.  His songs have been used in churches of every denomination across the globe, and consistently rank in the top 100 of CCLI’s Most Performed Songs List.  His song “Sit With Me A While” is a featured selection at the grave of President Ronald Reagan.  He travels around the world telling his story of freedom from homosexuality.  For more about who Dennis Jernigan visit Dennis Jernigan’s website. 

###

Source: Adams Group: Marketing to Christian Media. 

Some bad news and some good news. The “Thought Crimes” bill, H.R. 1592, passed the House of Representatives yesterday 237-180, but the White House issued a strong statement against it indicating a likely presidential veto of the bill. Your calls to the White House made a difference! (AFTAH and then CWA led the way in publicly calling on President Bush to clarify his stance on Hate Crimes.)

Now we need to keep calling the White House to urge a similar promise to veto the “ENDA Our Freedom” bill (Employment Nondiscrimination Act) — which would force religious business owners with 15 or more employees to violate their conscience to accommodate homosexual and “transgender” agendas in the workplace. For talking points against ENDA, click HERE.

TAKE ACTION: Call the White House and thank the President for his clear statement (below, or on PDF on the White House website HERE) on “Hate Crimes,” and urge him to do the same against the freedom-crushing ENDA. Call the White House at 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111, or write president@whitehouse.gov (the online comment page is HERE).

Also, call your U.S. Senators on the “Thought Crimes bill,” H.R. 1592, at 202-224-3121 or by going to http://www.congress.org/. Re: ENDA, you will need to call BOTH your Senators and your U.S. Representative, since ENDA hasn’t been voted on in either chamber.

Click HERE for a roll call of the House vote on H.R. 1592 (212 Democrats and 25 Republicans voted for it). The following is the White House statement on H.R. 1592 [emphasis in bold added]:

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
May 3, 2007 (House)

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

 

H.R. 1592 – Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007
(Rep. Conyers (D) Michigan and 171 cosponsors)

 

The Administration favors strong criminal penalties for violent crime, including crime based on personal characteristics, such as race, color, religion, or national origin. However, the Administration believes that H.R. 1592 is unnecessary and constitutionally questionable. If H.R. 1592 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.

 

State and local criminal laws already provide criminal penalties for the violence addressed by the new Federal crime defined in section 7 of H.R. 1592, and many of these laws carry stricter penalties (including mandatory minimums and the death penalty) than the proposed language in H.R. 1592. State and local law enforcement agencies and courts have the capability to enforce those penalties and are doing so effectively. There has been no persuasive demonstration of any need to federalize such a potentially large range of violent crime enforcement, and doing so is inconsistent with the proper allocation of criminal enforcement responsibilities between the different levels of government. In addition, almost every State in the country can actively prosecute hate crimes under the State’s own hate crimes law.

 

H.R. 1592 prohibits willfully causing or attempting to cause bodily injury to any person based upon the victim’s race, color, religion, or national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. The Administration notes that the bill would leave other classes (such as the elderly, members of the military, police officers, and victims of prior crimes) without similar special status. The Administration believes that all violent crimes are unacceptable, regardless of the victims, and should be punished firmly.

 

Moreover, the bill’s proposed section 249(a)(1) of title 18 of the U.S. Code raises constitutional concerns. Federalization of criminal law concerning the violence prohibited by the bill would be constitutional only if done in the implementation of a power granted to the Federal government, such as the power to protect Federal personnel, to regulate interstate commerce, or to enforce equal protection of the laws. Section 249(a)(1) is not by its terms limited to the exercise of such a power, and it is not at all clear that sufficient factual or legal grounds exist to uphold this provision of H.R. 1592.

We echo CWA’s call below for President Bush to use his bully pulpit to veto the “Thought Crimes” bill (H.R. 1592) —  and also ENDA, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, recently introduced in the House by homosexual Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). We’re counting on Mr. Bush to veto these pro-homosexual-activist bills, but the word we’re hearing from leaders in Washington is that the White House has still given no indication of where the President stands on either bill. Bush has only exercised a single veto, against Embryonic Stem Cell research, but he did promise that veto before the bill was passed.

How tragic it would be if the same president who committed American soldiers to fight and die to expand freedom in Iraq were to sign a bill that laid the foundation for restricting the “freedom to be moral” at home. That’s what these bills are all about. Otherwise, as my friend Matt Barber says, the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee would have adopted the proposed amendment to protect moral religious expression. There is no rash of anti-gay murders, nor are homosexuals having a problem getting jobs (although Barber got fired from Allstate for OPPOSING homosexuality on his own time!), so this is really about getting the heavy hand of the federal government involved in promoting homosexuality and gender confusion (“sexual orientation” and “gender identity”) as a “civil right.” And for the record, we at American For Truth oppose ALL “hate crimes” laws, not just those incorporating “sexual orientation.”– Peter LaBarbera

TAKE ACTION:  TAKE ACTION:  A House vote on “Hate Crimes” could come as early as Thursday.  Call the White House today at 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111 and urge President Bush to veto the “Thought Crimes” bill, H.R. 1592, and ENDA (the pro-homosexual, pro-transgender Employment Nondiscrimination Act)  if they pass.  Ask the president to use his bully pulpit — like he did  in promising to veto the Embryonic Stem Cell bill — against both the “Hate Crimes” and ENDA bills. You can e-mail President Bush at president@whitehouse.gov or by using the White House Contact Page.  

Also, contact your U.S. Congressman and Senators through the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 or through Congress.org. 

_____________________________ 

CWA Asks President for Veto Pledge on ‘Hate Crimes’ Legislation 

Washington, D.C. ––  In a recent letter to President Bush, Concerned Women for America (CWA) asked the President to veto H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, should it gain congressional approval. 

Congress appears poised to pass H.R. 1592 as early as Thursday.  This bill would grant individuals who engage in homosexual behavior (“sexual orientation”) or those who cross-dress (“gender identity”) preferential treatment over other citizens by elevating them to a specially protected class of victim. 

The 14th Amendment guarantees all citizens equal protection under the law, regardless of their chosen sexual behaviors.  There is no evidence to suggest that homosexuals or cross-dressers do not receive equal protection under the law.     

CWA President Wendy Wright pointed out, “Justice should be blind.  Matthew Shepherd’s assailants received the same sentence as Mary Stachowicz’s, a grandmother who was brutally murdered by a homosexual man.  Victims are — and should be — treated equally in the justice system, regardless of their ‘sexual orientation.’  This ‘hate crimes’ bill would overturn this balance, creating second-class victims and a federal justice system that discriminates against grandmothers, children, women and men simply because they are heterosexual.  We cannot imagine that President Bush would sign a bill that would create a two-tiered justice system that discriminates against grandmothers.”

Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues, noted, “Attempts by Republicans to make this legislation more inclusive by adding additional classes of citizens such as children, members of the military, the elderly or the homeless were refused by congressional liberals in committee last week.  That refusal underscores the exclusionary and discriminatory nature of this bill.  H.R. 1592 unequivocally treats one class of citizens preferentially over others.  

“Perhaps most frightening is the fact that liberal legislators have refused any amendment which would substantively protect religious expression in association with this legislation.  Similar laws have been used around the world — and right here at home — to silence opposition to the homosexual lifestyle.  That refusal speaks volumes about the true agenda behind this legislation, which is to grant official government recognition to both homosexual and cross-dressing behaviors, and to silence opposition to those behaviors,” concluded Barber.     

Concerned Women for America is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization.

By Chuck Colson, a Breakpoint Commentary

For further resources on this issue, go to the Breakpoint website. We encourage you to sign up for these excellent daily commentaries by e-mail.

In George Orwell’s classic novel 1984, the government Thought Police constantly spies on citizens to make sure they are not thinking rebellious thoughts. Thought crimes are severely punished by Big Brother.

1984 was intended as a warning against totalitarian governments that enslave and control their citizens. Never have we needed this warning more urgently than now, because America’s Thought Police are knocking on your door.

Last week the House Judiciary Committee, egged on by radical homosexual groups, passed what can only be called a Thought Crimes bill. It’s called the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. But this bill is not about hate. It’s not even about crime. It’s about outlawing peaceful speech—speech that asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong.

Some say we need this law to prevent attacks on homosexuals. But we already have laws against assaults on people and property. Moreover, according to the FBI, crimes against homosexuals in the United States have dropped dramatically in recent years. In 2005, out of 863,000 cases of aggravated assault, just 177 cases were crimes of bias against homosexuals—far less than even 1 percent.

Another problem is that in places where hate crimes laws have been passed, hate crimes have been defined to include verbal attacks—and even peaceful speech. The Thought Police have already prosecuted Christians under hate crimes laws in England, Sweden, Canada, and even in some places in the United States.

If this dangerous law passes, pastors who preach sermons giving the biblical view of homosexuality could be prosecuted. Christian businessmen who refuse to print pro-gay literature could be prosecuted. Groups like Exodus International, which offer therapy to those with unwanted same-sex attraction, could be shut down.

In classic 1984 fashion, peaceful speech will be redefined as a violent attack worthy of punishment.

This is the unspoken goal of activist groups. We know this because during the debate over the bill last week, Congressman Mike Pence (R) of Indiana offered a Freedom of Religion amendment to this hate crimes bill. It asked that nothing in this law limit the religious freedom of any person or group under the Constitution. The committee refused to adopt it. It also refused to adopt amendments protecting other groups from hate crimes—like members of the military, who are often targets of verbal attacks and spitting. They also shot down amendments that would protect the homeless and senior citizens, also often targeted by criminals. Nothing doing, the committee said—the only group they wanted to protect: homosexuals.

Clearly, the intent of this law is not to prevent crime, but to shut down freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of thought. Its passage would strike at the very heart of our democracy.

The full Congress may vote on this bill as early as this week. Unless you want Big Brother telling you what to say, what to think, and what to believe, I urge you to contact your congressman immediately, urging him or her to vote against this bill. If you visit the BreakPoint website, you’ll find more information about this radical law.

If we do nothing, 1984 will no longer be fiction, and Big Brother will be watching you and me—ready to punish the “wrong” thoughts.

“A Terribly Sad Day for Christians in America”: Traditional Values Coalition

The following is Traditional Values Coalition’s firsthand report from last week’s House Judiciary Committee hearing on the “Thought Crimes” bill, H.R. 1592 (the bill’s is benignly called the “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act”). Please note the portions in bold below:  

TVC REPORT FROM THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING ON THE “HATE CRIMES” BILL, H.R. 1592

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

For almost 11 hours Rev. Lou Sheldon, Chairman of Traditional Values Coalition, and CEO Andrea Lafferty monitored every move in the Judiciary Committee relevant to the HR 1592, the Hate Crimes bill.  They sat in the front row from early morning until it was concluded around 9:15 p.m. All 25 Republican amendments were defeated.  The purpose of the Markup is to vote on amendments to the bill.  There are 23 Democrats and 17 Republicans [in the Judiciary Committee].  HR 1592 passed by a party line vote, all Democrats supported it and all Republicans opposed.  Following is TVC’s account of the “Markup.”

TVC materials were used by numerous Congressmen in their presentations.  It was clear that they were quoting from documents TVC had produced.  Numerous Congressmen came over to us and thanked us for staying there all day and all night. 

The TVC staff worked diligently researching, creating reports, meeting with Members and their staff, contacting you the grassroots for help and MUCH MORE.

The first Republican amendment was proposed by Congressman Jim Jordon from Ohio adding those unborn babies and those partially-born babies to the list of protected classes.  However, Chairman Conyers ruled the amendment was non-germane, which means the members were not allowed to vote on it. 

Congressman Darrell Issa, Republican from California offered a clarifying amendment concerning unborn babies which failed.

Republican Congressman Dan Lungren from California stating that no where in the bill are the terms “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” definition and he asked for a definition.   The democrats referred to what they said was an accepted definition of sexual orientation, heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual.  The republicans did not agree stating that heterosexuality was not an orientation.

The democrats did not want to discuss a definition of even sexual orientation or have it in the bill.  They wanted no definitions.

Friends, it was obvious.  There are many additional orientations that would have had to be included in sexual orientation.  Also, they would have to agree to a definition of gender identity and they did not want that.  They obviously did not want to define gender identity to include she-male, cross-dresser, drag queen, transgender, transsexual, etc.

Republican Congressman Randy Forbes from Virginia stated that since it has been proven and established that our military are targets of hate and physical attack, many facilities are recommending that soldiers not wear their uniforms in large adjoining cities.  He mentioned several groups by name that are vehemently spitting on them and abusing them, only because they are US military personnel.

So Forbes offered an amendment to also include military personnel as a protected class and thus to attack them would also be a hate crime.  It was defeated.

The Republicans offered many good amendments to add categories that would be covered by the bill.  They did a very good job trying to clarify the bill and hold the democrats accountable.

Senior Citizens should be a protected class as old people are being beaten up and robbed. Rosa Parks got mugged in Detroit.  Another suggested protected class was Pregnant Women who are battered by boy friends, live-in boyfriends or husbands because they are pregnant. Republican Congressman Tom Feeney of Florida offered an amendment to add the “homeless.”   All were defeated.

Republican Congressman Louis Gohmert of Texas moved to remove “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” from the bill.  It failed on a recorded vote of 19 to 13.

Congressman Mike Pence from Indiana offered the important amendment on Freedom of Religion.  “Nothing in this section limits the religious freedom of any person or group under the constitution.”

A number of Republicans spoke in support of it.  But the Democrats Jerrold Nadler, Tammy Baldwin and Chairman John Conyers kept evading the issue.

Finally, Congressman Gohmert asked, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”

Gohmert was attempting to clarify and emphasize that the legislation would have an effect on the constitutional right to religious freedom and thus the Pence amendment was needed to protect religious speech.

The Democrats continued to explain why they could not accept the amendment.  Lundgren continuously shot down their answer.  He said, “What is your answer?  Would there be incitement charges against the pastor?”

And finally Democrat Congressman Artur Davis from Alabama spoke up and said, “Yes.”

Friends, that is what we have been warning you about and our legal advice was correct.  It is evident what HR 1592 is about.  It is not about homosexuals and cross dressers suffering with no food, shelter or jobs, it is about preventing Bible-believing people and pastors from speaking the truth. 

It is about punishing them so they will not dare to speak the truth.

It is about threatening them with prison so they won’t dare speak the truth.

The Judiciary Committee could easily have accepted the amendment, “Nothing in this section limits the religious freedom of any person or group under the constitution.” 

Rev. Lou Sheldon stated, “By refusing to accept this amendment the Democrats on this committee have proven their purpose, to remove freedom of religion from the U.S. Constitution.”

This is an up-to-the minute report late tonight.   

Tomorrow we will send you more news and an Action item so you can write your elected officials.  THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER YET.  HR 1592 WILL GO TO THE HOUSE FLOOR, VERY LIKELY EARLY NEXT WEEK.

Your financial help is urgently needed as we work to defeat HR 1592 on the House floor and continue to uphold and protect Biblical principles here at the Congress.  TVC can be reached at http://www.traditionalvalues.org/ or by calling 202-547-8570.

Scottish Christian Party to make Holyrood election a referendum on the Sexual Orientation Regulation

GLASGOW, Scotland, April 30 /Christian Newswire/ — With the Sexual Orientation Regulations becoming law at midnight last night the Scottish Christian Party has mailed 2 million anti- Sexual Orientation Regulation leaflets to voters in Scotland.

In the Glasgow and the Central region of Scotland ¾ million leaflets have been sent in personally addressed envelopes with a covering letter.

Reverend George Hargreaves, leader of the Scottish Christian Party said, “We intend to high-jack the political agenda as far Christians are concerned. The SOR’s are a far more urgent matter to many Scottish Christians than independence or any other current political issue. It is an assault on their faith and conscience.

Thursday is their chance to say ‘No!’ to the SORs.”

In the party’s election broadcast, aired on BBC and STV last Tuesday, the SORs were compared to anti- Semitic laws passed by the Nazis in the early 1930’s. The broadcast featured footage of Hitler addressing a rally in 1933.

Reverend Hargreaves noted, “We are turning the Holyrood elections into a de-facto referendum on the Sexual Orientation Regulations.”

Note to Editors: In 2000 Brian Souter’s Keep the Clause campaign gained the support of over 1 million Scots. The Scottish Christian Party are fielding 72 candidates across Scotland on the Regional List; more than any other political party.

Media Release, Concerned Women for America (202-488-7000):

“Hate crimes” bill H.R. 1592, which is on the fast track to passage in Congress, will officially give homosexuals and cross dressers special elevated status in society based upon their chosen sexual behaviors and/or wardrobe.  Under H.R. 1592, the victims at Virginia Tech would officially be considered less valuable to society than homosexuals and cross dressers who are the targets of insults, intimidation, simple assault or other “violent acts.”

The 14^th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees “equal protection under the law” for all citizens — regardless of their sexual preference.  “Hate crimes” legislation flies in the face of the 14^th Amendment.  Such legislation would require the government to invest more resources in the investigation and prosecution of crimes against homosexuals than it would the victims at Virginia Tech.  It is an irrefutable fact that H.R. 1592 would treat certain citizens unequally from others.

Concerned Women for America (CWA) asks Congress to grant equal government resources, concern and respect to the victims at Virginia Tech and their families as they do to the demands of liberal homosexual activists by reaffirming the precepts of the 14^th Amendment and voting NO on this dangerous and discriminatory piece of legislation.

“If Seung-Hui Cho’s horrific actions were not an act of ‘hate,’ then what where they?” asked Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues with CWA. “All violent crimes are ‘hate crimes.’ By H.R. 1592’s definition, Cho’s actions would have constituted a ‘hate crime’ except for the fact that he targeted his victims with the wrong kind of bias.  In this case, Cho ‘perceived’ his victims to be ‘rich kids.’  However, under H.R. 1592, ‘rich kids’ are not a specially protected class like homosexuals, so Cho’s crime is second tier and would be considered less egregious.

“The FBI’s latest statistics show that there were zero ‘hate crimes’ murders committed against homosexuals or those perceived to be homosexual in 2005; yet we already know of thirty-two so-called ‘hate crimes’ murders committed against perceived ‘rich kids’ in a single day.  But under H.R. 1592, those ‘rich kids’ would be denied the same protections and justice as homosexuals.  The whole ‘hate crimes’ concept really places logic and reason on its head,” concluded Barber.

Concerned Women for America is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization.