Rubio Attempts to pass Islamic Blasphemy Laws

a reply to: butcherguy

I brought up the Middle East in my first post to make a point.  
I live in the United States.  
The US has a Constitution that guarantees freedom of religion.  
To act as if this country is a hotbed of hatred is wrong.  
We allow people to worship as they please here. How many Catholic churches are there in Saudi Arabia?  
We are a pretty accepting bunch here.  

Yes you said that already. Nobody is denying any of that.

The resolution is for ALL religions, be it Judaism, Islam or Christianity. The OP has singled out the Islam part just to create a clickbait thread. In fact I posted part of the resolution on first page.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

Oh. So you did read it.
So we do live in a country where only Christian places of worship are allowed?

My point still stands.
We have freedom of religion and we are a very tolerant bunch, whether anyone wants to admit that.

Get my point yet?

Mmmmmm free speech smells sooo gooooooood!

*oh, wait..what?*

a reply to: butcherguy

That was your point? That we have the freedom to worship here? I don't see anyone denying that.

originally posted by: skynet2015
This is old news but,

Disguised as hate crime protections, Sen. Marco Rubio "in order to protect minority communities", has attempted to pass a law that holds all Americans under criminal prosecution for Blasphemy, as categorized under (and only under) the Islamic religion. This bill does not protect Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, Seventh Day Adventists, Satanists, Wiccans, Buddhists, or Jews. It does not protect Christians or prosecute American citizens for saying negative things against Buddha, against Jesus, or against the Goddess or Horned God, but it DOES empower legal repercussions against people criticizing Muhammed, Islam, and Islamic terrorists.

investmentwatchblog.com...

creepingsharia.wordpress.com...

III

115th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. RES. 118

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

April 5 (legislative day, April 4), 2017

Ms. Harris (for herself, Mr. Rubio, Mrs. Feinstein, and Ms. Collins) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Condemning hate crime and any other form of racism, religious or ethnic bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus targeting a minority in the United States.

Whereas, in the past several years, violent crimes, threats of violence, and other incidents of hate-motivated targeting of religious, racial, and ethnic minorities have increased across the United States;

Whereas, in 2015, hate crimes targeting Muslims in the United States increased by 67 percent, reaching a level of violence targeting Muslim Americans that the United States had not experienced since the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, attacks, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation;

Whereas, in 2015, anti-Semitic incidents increased in the United States for the second straight year, according to the Anti-Defamation League’s 2015 Audit of Anti-Semitic Incidents, which describes trends such as the tripling of assaults targeting Jews since 2012 and the rise of online harassment and hate speech directed at Jewish journalists and individuals through social media;

Whereas, in 2015, anti-Semitic incidents at institutions of higher education nearly doubled compared to the number of those incidents in 2014, and during the 2016–2017 school year there has been an increase in white supremacist activity on college campuses across the United States, according to the Anti-Defamation League;

Whereas, in 2015, among single-bias hate crime incidents in the United States, 59.2 percent of victims were targeted due to racial, ethnic, or ancestry bias, and among those victims, 52.2 percent were victims of crimes motivated by their offenders’ anti-Black or anti-African American bias, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation;

Whereas, in 2017, there have been more than 100 reported bomb threats against Jewish community centers, Jewish day schools, and other Jewish organizations and institutions in more than 38 States;

Whereas, in 2017, Islamic centers and mosques have been burned in the States of Texas, Washington, and Florida, and Jewish cemeteries have been desecrated in the States of Missouri and Pennsylvania;

Whereas, in 2017, there has been harassment and hate-based violence against individuals who are perceived to be Arab or Muslim, including members of South Asian communities in the United States, and Hindu and Sikh Americans have been the target of hate-based violence targeting religious minorities; and

Whereas, on February 28, 2017, President Donald Trump, before a joint session of Congress, acknowledged threats targeting Jewish community centers and the vandalism of Jewish cemeteries, and stated that "we are a country that stands united in condemning hate and evil in all of its very ugly forms": Now, therefore, be it

That the Senate—
(1)

affirms that the United States stands united in condemning hate and evil in all forms;
(2)

rejects hate-motivated crime as an attack on the fabric of the society of the United States and the ideals of pluralism and respect;
(3)

condemns hate crime and any other form of racism, religious or ethnic bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus targeting a minority in the United States;
(4)

calls on Federal law enforcement officials, working with State and local officials—
(A)

to expeditiously investigate all credible reports of hate crimes and incidents and threats against minorities in the United States; and
(B)

to hold the perpetrators of those crimes, incidents, or threats accountable and bring the perpetrators to justice;
(5)

encourages the Department of Justice and other Federal agencies—
(A)

to work to improve the reporting of hate crimes; and
(B)

to emphasize the importance of the agencies' collection and reporting of data pursuant to Federal law;
(6)

encourages the development of an interagency task force led by the Attorney General to collaborate on the development of effective strategies and efforts to detect and deter hate crime in order to protect minority communities; and
(7)

calls on the executive branch—
(A)

to continue to offer Federal assistance that may be available for victims of hate crimes; and
(B)

to continue to carry out safety and preparedness programs for religious institutions, places of worship, and other institutions that have been targeted because of the affiliation of the institutions with any particular religious, racial, or ethnic minority in the United States.

Not even in the ballpark of what you suggest.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I suppose some see it as more punishment for hate crimes against the minorities to deter such behavior. People have no problem adding more punishment for people who commit crimes against cops because they hate cops.

The problem we run into with that, is that it becomes a de facto legislative morality. And it never works. You simply can not legislate morals anymore than one can legislate away alcohol or narcotics. It should, theoretically at least, be even more difficult to legislate or make a mandate regarding morals than any other sort of prohibition. You can keep a product out of my hands mug easier than you can force my mind to cease its normal actions. It becomes a really slippery slope argument and as previously mentioned, it is a pretty clear violation of the Equal Protection clause in the 14th. At the end of the day though, in regards to the OP, it's all just an exercise in semantics because there is no law of this nature put forth by Rubio or any other Senator and resolutions are little more than an agreed upon suggestion or wish list.

a reply to: skynet2015

All I have to say is,

# Islam and

# Marco Rubio!

I'm not big on the idea of any speech being a crime, but this is dealing with violent crimes, bombs, arson and the like and it covers all minorities and religions. As long as hate crimes are limited to actual acts including real discrimination, then I'm all for it.

What a lot of fuss over an affirmation that the Senate condemns such behavior. That source is a truly bad one with an agenda.

a reply to: Blaine91555

It's even more clear if people would actually read the resolution. It's only about one page long & it lists a lot of incidences of violence that have targeted those various minority groups.

That's exactly why "fake news" still exists. Because people will kneejerk agree or disagree with a headline based on personal biases without even looking at the source behind the "story".

but why set up extra protection for any group? Don't the existing rules protect them the same way they would protect me? Why does any group deserve extra protection?

a reply to: Woodcarver

Did you read the actual resolution it's referring to? It's only about 1 page (HERE) and it describes what's actually going on in detail. And more importantly, it's not a law nor does it have the force of law. The OP is referencing a BS clickbait site's interpretation that took the entire resolution completely out of context.