Hate-crimes law worries pastors

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Hate-crimes law worries pastors
12
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 10:47am
Free Speech or Big Brother....very concerning

Some consider liability insurance

to cover pulpit remarks

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

A religious liberty group is trying to reassure Pennsylvania pastors who fear they could face prosecution under a new law if they preach against homosexuality.

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty sent a letter to 9,000 houses of worship across the state June 18 after a hate-crimes law was amended to add "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" as motives that trigger heavier penalties for the crime of "harassment."

"It is a measure of our times that religious leaders have lately considered taking out liability insurance to cover remarks made from the pulpit," said Becket Fund President Kevin J. Hasson.

************

Of particular concern to pastors is the amendment's expansion of the definition of "harassment" to include "harassment by communication" – which means one could be convicted on the basis of spoken words alone.

************

"Although legislators expressly disavowed the motive at the time, one might be forgiven the impression that one purpose of this legislation was to generate a fear of prosecution among those who would preach and teach in favor of the traditional prohibition on homosexual behavior – a teaching so common to so many faiths," Hasson noted.

However, the Becket Fund's letter explained to clergy that the new law should not deter them from preaching against homosexual conduct.

**********

The group says that although the language of the law appears to cover preaching from the pulpit, it is *******unlikely****** to be applied that way.

**********

The Becket Fund also offered to help ministers threatened with such prosecution.

"We will defend, free of charge, anything said from the pulpit, conservative or liberal, wisdom or nonsense, so long as it is a religious message given in good faith," Hasson declared.

As WorldNetDaily reported, Canada recently added sexual orientation as a protected category in its genocide and hate-crimes legislation, which carries a penalty of up to five years in prison.

Opponents fear the Bible will be regarded as "hate literature" under the criminal code in certain instances, as evidenced by the case of a Saskatchewan man fined by a provincial human-rights tribunal for taking out a newspaper ad with Scripture references to verses about homosexuality.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 1:00pm
What would happen if someone preached against women, African Americans, etc?
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 1:05pm
I don'y know but it is just as scary
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 1:24pm
Saying one is against homosexuality is one thing, no one is going to charge them for that, though I wish someone would ask them "what are you thinking?" since the attitude itself is the result of flawed logic.

Who has need to fear are those like several Jamaican performers who advocate killing lgbt people. One was just busted in the UK for this.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 1:30pm
"since the attitude itself is the result of flawed logic. "

Very debatable but there is a bigger issue at stake. Free Speech.

"Who has need to fear are those like several Jamaican performers who advocate killing lgbt people. One was just busted in the UK for this."

Obviously this is hateful speech. However, when a rapper in the country advocates killing Cops it is free speech and artistic expression. But a preacher has to worry about preaching the Bible so much so that he takes out insurance? This country is really got its priorities screwed up.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 1:44pm
I haven't seen anyone suggest *ever* that a preacher cannot rail against lgbt people. As far as I am concerned this is a total non-issue, and that is most certainly not the intent of that law.

I agree about rapping about killing cops... advocating killing anyone is *equally* wrong.

And no matter how you try to paint it, judging others adversely because they love someone of the same sex is rooted in flawed logic. You are free to believe otherwise, that doesn't alter the fact it is flawed.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 2:21pm
"I haven't seen anyone suggest *ever* that a preacher cannot rail against lgbt people. "

The law allows this possibility, if it isn't the intent.

"And no matter how you try to paint it, judging others adversely because they love someone of the same sex is rooted in flawed logic."

We are both entitled to an opinion. There is no "fact" stating one position that another "fact" can't dipute.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 3:39pm
Whenever there is a disagreement over whether to discriminate against another, it does not take much thought to realise those that put others down are wrong.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 4:14pm

Never heard of the "Becket Fund" so I googled. When something wacky is in the news, such as this, there's generally an agenda. Looks to me as though the aim is to erase the seperation of church & state. What do you think?


Becket Fund for Religious Liberty


Category: Religious


Website: www.becketfund.org


Headquarters: 1350 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 605,
Washington, D.C. 20036


UN Status: ECOSOC Special Consultative Status (2002)


Mission: The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty believes that "the First Amendment protects you from government-imposed secularism as well as government-imposed religion; the practice of religion need not be confined to the privacy of one's own home; that religious expression deserves the same kind of protection as any other speech; and that all people have the same right to use government facilities and receive government benefits, regardless of their religious faith."


Initiatives: Free speech; Free practice of religion; Fighting religious discrimination; Protection of the rights of religious people
and institutions to participate in public affairs


Leadership: Kevin J. Hasson, President
Anthony Picarello, Vice-President and Legal Counsel
Roman Storzer, Director of Litigation


Info. from..... http://www.ngowatch.org/becketfund.htm


(From The Becket Fund site) What they're saying about us . . .











"I commend The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty for your commitment to the advancement of the cause of religious freedom based on human dignity. Organizations like yours, dedicated to defending the free expression of all religious traditions, help make America a better place."


President George W. Bush











"The Becket Fund . . . aims to prevent religion from being required to render unto Caesar more subservience than is required by the First Amendment's prohibition of 'establishment' of religion, and to see that Caesar renders unto religion the respect mandated by the guarantee of the 'free exercise' of religion."


Newsweek columnist George Will












" comes very close, it seems to me, to grasping the core difficulty of today's church-state debate."


Washington Post columnist William Raspberry











"I express a particular word of appreciation to the Becket Fund, for its many efforts in defence of religious freedom in the United States and around the world."


Pope John Paul II




 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 5:10pm
<>

I have a difficult time with this statement. Has the group created the fear by their advertisement for insurance, or is there a genuine fear. Why a sermon on homosexuality, a member of a church would have previous knowledge of the tenents of the religion. Again we come to the question--where is the line between church and state? Is there a line? It smells fishy to me.

<>

How can taking out a newspaper ad be compared to a sermon? Does Canada have a freedom of speech amendment.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 5:17pm
<<"the First Amendment protects you from government-imposed secularism as well as government-imposed religion...">>

Heard this before, the evangelicans tried to turn secularism into a religion.

<<" comes very close, it seems to me, to grasping the core difficulty of today's church-state debate.">>

Although I assume Raspberry and I think about this differently, I do think it is time to take this issue to the Supreme Court. I personally, am confused as to what the admendment encompases.




Pages