If you believe the so-called hate crimes bill, HR 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 - that liberals quietly railroaded through the House of Representative a few days ago and is now on the fast-track to be passed in the Senate any day now - is NOT an imminent threat to YOUR way of life... you MUST read this letter. 

     If you believe that HR 1913 DOESN'T affect you, or your family or your way of life because you don't "hate" anyone... what you are about to read may disturb and shock you. 

     If you believe that those who claim that HR 1913 will lay the foundation for the persecution of any and all people who simply reject the most radical aspects of the gay agenda or sincerely believe that marriage is between a man and a woman are wearing tin-foil hats... the you REALLY NEED to read this letter. 

     If you think it's a gross exaggeration to say that opposition to the radical gay agenda will be effectively CRIMINALIZED and American society will see an unprecedented uprising of militant homosexuals demanding that anyone who speaks against their agenda be hauled off to jail... think again.  

     At the risk of using cheap clichés; THIS MAY BE THE MOST IMPORTANT LETTER YOU EVER READ.

     In fact... you not only need to read this letter... you also need to take action... and only after you have read this letter and taken action, YOU NEED TO FORWARD THIS LETTER TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW. 

     Kevin Theriot with the Alliance Defense Fund claims that HR 1913 SERVES ONLY ONE PURPOSE: 

“So-called ‘hate crime’ laws actually serve only one purpose: The criminalization of citizens based on whatever thoughts, beliefs, and emotions they have that are not considered to be ‘politically correct.’ No one should fall for the idea that this bill does anything to bring about greater justice for Americans.” 

     But Theriot is not entirely correct. HR 1913 won't simply CRIMINALIZE YOUR THOUGHTS, it may also DECRIMINALIZE things like pedophilia and a host of other criminal perversions. 

     Congressman Louie Gohmert, a former judge, recounts to Human Events, with obvious disgust, what happened when House Republicans simply tried to amend HR 1913 so it did NOT OFFER PROTECTION TO PEDOPHILES. 

     Take the time to read these statements... the sheer absurdity of what Gohmert describes will make your skin crawl. 

“'When we tried to get the term sexual orientation narrowed down to where it didn’t include something like a pedophile... that was voted down on party lines... there are about 30 different types of sexual orientations, and they can include exhibitionism and voyeurism or things that are so offensive such as pedophilia or necrophilia and bestiality. The problem is that the supporters of this bill did not want to exclude any of those and even voted down the amendment that would have excluded pedophilia.'” 

"Gohmert pointed out the absurdity of the legislation as written which would warrant the prosecution of a woman under the federal hate crimes statues if she hits a flasher with her purse after he exposed himself to her. Exhibitionism is a protected sexual orientation under this bill. 

“'The one who did the flashing committed a local misdemeanor,' Gohmert said. 'The one who hit with the purse singled him out because he’s an exhibitionist, and therefore she has now committed a federal hate crime and is looking at felony time.'” 

     You read that right. And yes, if you keep reading, it gets EVEN WORSE. 

     The Senate may vote on HR 1913 any day now. The time to make your voice heard is now. 

 

     A great many things started coming out of the woodwork not too long ago when the voters of California voted on Proposition 8, a very simply amendment that affirms that marriage is between one man and one woman. 

     As that battle started to pick up steam, David Benkof wrote the following in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. As you read the quote below, keep in mind that Benkof is no "right-wing extremist." Actually, he's been a "gay-activist" for over a decade. 

"For the past two weeks, I have been contacting 'marriage equality' leaders all over California to ask about the impact of redefining marriage on religious freedom. All, including several prominent lesbian and gay legislators and other leaders, have refused to disclose their opinions, some repeatedly." 

"Although California marriage-equality leaders won't say what impact they expect the new decision to have on religious freedom, activists in other states haven't been so shy. Openly gay Washington state Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, and a representative of the largest Michigan gay-rights group, the Triangle Foundation, have both told me that people who continue to act as if marriage is a union between a man and a woman should face being fined, fired and even jailed until they relent." 

     Conservative activist, and former homosexual, James Hartline, offered this insider's view: 

"The Mechanical Eye states this is an imaginary threat: That is what the gay movement would like all Californians to believe right now." 

"Well, I have absolute evidence that a number of homosexual entities are already planning to sue pastors who refuse to perform same-sex weddings. The ACLU is biting at the bit, as they have done for the past four decades, to sue anyone who refuses to perform the same marriages that are provided to heterosexual couples." 

     And just in case you're thinking that Benkof and Hartline are engaging in mere supposition or repeating the hollow threats of others, consider that many states and localities already have hate crime laws on the books and these laws are abused regularly. 

     Here's Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family, quoted in WorldNetDaily.com: 

"'We've seen charges brought by homosexuals against a video reproduction business in Virginia, a medical clinic in California, an adoption service in Arizona and a church in New Jersey,' he continued. 'Colorado tops them all on the potential outrage meter, however, because in addition to civil fines and penalties, small-business owners can be prosecuted under the criminal laws of Colorado and spend up to one year in jail for trying to live according to their faith.'" 

     And you might remember the case of the Philadelphia 11. 

     A group of Christians (which included grandmothers and young people) were arrested on a variety of charges that carried prison terms of up to 47 years. Their "crime"? They staged a peaceful protest at a Philadelphia "gay fest." Incredibly, a state judge got around the First Amendment and determined that the prosecutions could go forward by asserting that the Christians’ speech constituted “fighting words.” 

     Of course you didn't read about these incidents (as well as many others) in your local paper or hear about these incidents on the nightly news. The same Mainstream Media that either ignored or ridiculed the TEA Parties that recently took place across the nation simply won't report on such things. 

     And don't expect any help from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Janet Napolitano's DHS apparently believes that YOU are a terrorist... a danger to the nation that must be carefully watched. 

 

     You already know what happened to Carrie Prejean, Miss USA California. 

     During the question-and-answer portion of the Miss USA competition, one of the judges, a "celebrity blogger" (whatever that is) by the name of Perez Hilton asked Prejean how she felt about Proposition 8 and "same-sex marriage." 

     Of course, questions of a politically nature are typically taboo in beauty pageants but that didn't matter to Hilton. 

     It also didn't matter to Hilton that Prejean gave a very diplomatic answer. She even qualified her answer by saying that it was great that we lived in a country where people in individual states could vote on the matter. Then she added that she PERSONALLY believed that marriage is between a man and a woman. 

     The crowd cheered and Hilton became enraged (some might even say unbalanced), it didn't matter Hilton that Prejean's answer was given with poise and kindness. It didn't matter that Prejean's answer didn't necessarily diminish Hilton's perceived "right" to engage in homosexual acts and call it a "marriage." 

     What did matter to Hilton was that Prejean didn't agree, in totality, with Hilton; and for her blasphemy, she had to punished. 

     He gave her a big fat zero which may have cost her the Miss USA crown. 

     But Hilton wasn't through with Prejean... not yet. That night - being a celebrity blogger, apparently with something of a following - he posted a hateful, rant on YouTube.com. He screamed and called Prejean "a stupid B-----." 

     Shortly thereafter, he "apologized," but hours later he took the half-hearted apology back and called Prejean a "c---." Hilton even drew obscene images over photographs of Prejean, scanned them, and posted them on the Internet. 

     Prejean may have gotten off easy.  Fortunately for her, HR 1913 isn't the law yet. 

     No... that's not an attempt at humor! 

     Let's say, for instance, that some unknown person decided that Hilton was so rude that he was just asking for a beating (not unlikely) and took matters into his own hands. 

     Under HR 1913, Prejean could be charged with a hate crime and face years in jail. UnderHR 1913, Hilton could contend that Prejean's personal assertion that marriage is between a man and a woman sparked the beating. If a court determined that there was an element of conspiracy involved, or if it was determined that Prejean possibly made the statement knowing that it could inflame some person to physically harm Hilton, Prejean would be hauled off to jail. 

     Now admittedly, even in today's politically charged climate, it is probable that Prejean would EVENTUALLY be acquitted, but it can not be stressed enough that such an assertion on Hilton's part would be more than enough to substantiate such a charge. Prejean would be forced to go through the ordeal of arrest and prosecution. She would be forced to hire an attorney, go to court and spend an incredible amount of money defending herself. 

     Remember what happened to the Duke University Lacrosse Team several years back. These young men were tirelessly pursued by a political-opportunist masquerading as a local prosecutor. 

     When the prosecutor obtained evidence that proved the innocence of these young men, he not only continued his prosecution, he withheld the evidence.  The media convicted these young men in the court of public opinion within days.  And yes, these young men were eventually exonerated... but only after their lives had been ruined. 

     Make no mistake... HR 1913 is a horrendous and tyrannical constraint on free speech. 

 

     There's an old expression, taken from the Bible; "But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good..." (Genisis 50:20 KJV). And perhaps there is something to be learned from the Prejean-Hilton incident that can be used for good. 

     Essentially, Hilton let the cat out of the bag. There is a very radical minority within the homosexual community that is passionately driven by an irrational hatred of normalcy (and Christianity in particular) and many of the individuals within that minority, because of this radical and passionate hatred, gravitate toward political activism. That's why certain individuals and organizations are often described as being part of the "radical homosexual movement." 

     And these individuals and organizations control much of what is known as the"homosexual political movement," and while they posture and claim that they represent the greater homosexual community, such is not necessarily, or always the case. 

     Many of these individuals within the "radical homosexual movement" are not motivated by things as supposedly noble-sounding as, "the right to live my life as I choose" or "the right to love whom I want to love." 

     Perez Hilton may very well become the poster-child for the "radical homosexual movement." He may have inadvertently done this country an invaluable service byshowing all of America the level of intense and irrational hatred that is behind the "radical homosexual movement." 

     This is the intense hatred that motivated those who tried to sue the Boy Scouts into bankruptcy for years because the Scouts would not allow homosexual pedophiles to become Scoutmasters. 

     This is the intense hatred that motivates people to burn down the homes of ministers(Rev. Chuck McIlhenny for example), desecrate the Eucharist in Catholic Churches and march in "gay-rights parades" where many dress freakishly and defiantly and proudly pantomime perverse acts for all to see. 

     And this is the intense hatred that motivated many of those at the forefront of the movement to push so-called hate crimes legislation for years. 

     You may believe, like Carrie Prejean, that marriage is between a man and a woman. No"hatred" is necessary to hold that believe, but, IF you hold that belief, there are people out there that have an irrational and burning hatred toward YOU and have ever intention of using this law to act on that hatred and force you into submission to their worldview. 

     If we allow the Senate to pass HR 1913 and you meet someone in this vocal and radical minority within the homosexual community - someone motivated by the same hatred that motivates men like Perez Hilton - on the street be very afraid... and be very silent. 

     At the very least, don't be shocked if that person approaches you, asks you for your opinion on so-called "same-sex marriage," goes home, beats his head up against the wall until it's bloody, falsely claims to the authorities that your hateful words incited a violent act against him and then has you arrested for a hate crime. 

     And if you think the prospect of being falsely accused of a hate crime in such a manner sounds a little far-fetched... read on... it may shock you to find out that it happens with some frequency! 

 

     According to the FBI only 1,460 out of 1.5 million violent crimes reported in the United States in 2007 were REPORTEDLY based on sexual orientation – that's under one-tenth of one percent. 

     That's hardly the "epidemic" that the proponents of hate crimes legislation cite as the reason why this federal law is so desperately needed. 

     So why is it necessary to get a federal hate crimes law on the books? 

     In 2000, a conservative clergyman sat in the Supreme Court gallery, listening as opposing sides argued a New Jersey case challenging the Boy Scouts’ exclusion of homosexuals. 

     Thinking the clergyman who was sitting nearby was a fellow liberal, President Bill Clinton’s liaison to the homosexual community leaned over and confided to the clergyman: 

"We're not going to win this case, but that's OK. Once we get 'hate crime' laws on the books, we're going to go after the [Boy] Scouts and all the other bigots." 

     If this sick bill becomes law, American society will see an unprecedented uprising of militant homosexuals, demanding that anyone who speaks against their agenda be hauled off to jail and charged with a “hate crime.” 

     Actually, reporting bogus hate crimes may be as much of an "epidemic" as hate crimes. 

     A Family Research Council report cites just a few examples: 

“In Houston, a homosexual mugging victim was left for dead in a traditionally 'straight' section of town. The press initially covered it as a hate crime, but investigators soon found that the man had been assaulted elsewhere and transported there, 'to make it look like a hate crime.'" 

“In Salt Lake City, a homosexual teacher at first thought bias offenders had put signs in her yard to intimidate her, but some of her own homosexual students later confessed to doing it.” 

"In South Carolina, a lesbian was charged with giving false information to a police officer for saying that she was beaten; police contend she hired a man to beat her and then she reported it as a hate crime." 

     John Leo, a columnist for U. S. News and World Report, has reported on bogus hate crimes for years.  Here are several more examples: 

“Jerry Kennedy, a gay resident assistant at the University of Georgia, reported he had been the target of nine hate crimes over a period of three years, including three acts of arson. But during questioning, Kennedy admitted that he had set the fires.”  

"[A] lesbian student at Eastern New Mexico University said she had been attacked after her name was included with the names of seven professors on an antigay 'hit list' posted at a local Laundromat. Police arrested her after a surveillance camera at the Laundromat showed her posting the list.” 

“Two weeks after the murder of Matthew Shepard, a lesbian student at St. Cloud State University in Minnesota said two men shouted antigay slurs at her and then slashed her face. Outraged students raised nearly $12,000 as a reward for information about her attackers. Then the student confessed she had made up the story and cut her own face.”     

     And while we're on the subject of Matthew Shepard, here's something that perhaps youDIDN'T know about this young man who was supposedly killed BECAUSE he was a homosexual... the young man who became a household name after his death and has hate crimes laws in many localities named in his memory, WAS NOT killed because he was a homosexual. 

     It's been known for years. The media knows it.  The "radical homosexual movement"knows it.  Legislators who pander to the radical homosexual movement know it. 

     The two psychotic thugs who killed Shepard eventually admitted that they had planned to rob someone BEFORE they had even bumped into Shepard. The robbery went bad and they killed Shepard. 

     This unfortunate young man was simply, and so very sadly, in the wrong place at the wrong time; and yet the "radical homosexual movement" continues, after all these years, to DISGUSTINGLY EXPLOIT HIS MEMORY. 

     And yet, the MONUMENTAL IRONY here must be stated.  The most famous "hate crime"of all time is nothing more than a FABRICATION that is being perpetuated in a conspiratorial fashion by a single-minded special interest for the express purpose of promoting a hate-driven agenda.

     If we allow the Senate to pass this hateful hate crimes bill, do you believe bogus hate crime reports will increase or decrease? 

 

     You might remember the case of Crystal Dixon who was summarily fired by the University of Toledo. 

     Dixon - a high-ranking administrator and an African-American - wrote a letter to the editor objecting to the comparison of so-called "gay rights" with the civil rights struggles of African-Americans. 

     In case you're wondering, here's what Dixon wrote: 

"As a Black woman... I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are 'civil rights victims.' Here's why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a Black woman. I am genetically and biologically a Black woman and very pleased to be so as my Creator intended." 

     That exercise of her First Amendment rights got her fired! 

     Dixon's termination is not an isolated incident! 

     Allstate Insurance Company fired Matt Barber for writing an article for a Christian publication on the medical risks of homosexual behavior during non-working hours. 

     Boston public school teachers are threatened with termination if they fail to portray so-called "same-sex marriage" in a positive light. 

     John Whitehead, writing for Dakota Voice, spells out exactly what is wrong with this so-called hate crimes bill. 

     According to Whitehead, "it opens the door for federal law enforcement officials (whether it be agents from the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and so on) to crack down on undesirable behavior wherever it occurs. The problem, which few want to acknowledge for fear of being labeled politically incorrect, or worse homophobic, is that in order to crack down on hateful behavior, hateful thoughts and expression must also be targeted..." 

     Whitehead also says: 

"On the whole, hate crime laws unnecessarily blur the distinction between what might be constitutionally protected, albeit deplorable, speech and criminal behavior. Eventually, this will spill over into criminalizing any kind of speech that any official in the echelons of government deems to be hateful or distasteful. Thus, hate crime laws... open the door for a whole new realm of prosecutions, namely thought crimes." 

     This totalitarian bill, HR 1913, must never become law. 

     And there is no stopping HR 1913 if the Senate passes it. Barack Obama WILL sign it into law. 

     The time to act is now. Speak now, or you may be forever forced (under penalty of law)to hold your peace.