Donkey Puncherelli

Since I don't follow any news blogs or anything news related at all, I depend on my Twitter feed to update me with all the shenanigans going on in the world. I recently happened upon a twitter that relayed to me the passing of The Matthew Shepard/James Byrd Jr Act. It is now waiting around in President Obama's office to be signed into law.

It is now a federal crime to attack a person based on their gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Strange that it is 2009 and something like this is just now being passed. Granted, these two acts (The Matthew Shepard/James Byrd Jr Hate Crimes Prevention Acts) had to piggy back the larger National Defense and Authorization Act of 2009, but at least they were passed. You would think that something that prevents attacks on people because of something such as their gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability would meet with little opposition but let me tell you, that was not the case with this bill.

Let me share with you the opposing logics to this bill. Mostly it can be summed up by reciting the name of James Dobson. Having said that, I'm sure a kitten just got smashed by the giant tire of an SUV somewhere in God's America. Ringleader of Tormentors, Dobson is the daddy of the Focus On The Family group. Usually, in Dobson's hate of all things rainbows and unicorns, there is some sort of twisted logic that makes a small amount of sense. To comprehend it, you have to be pretty brainwashed to begin with, but that is beside the point.

Part of the reason why there was opposition to this bill passing was because according to Dobson and a host of others, this bill would protect pedophiles, perverts, and a myriad of other sexual deviants. Let us not forget that Dobson made the claim that the act would essentially "muzzle people of faith who dare to express their moral and biblical concerns about homosexuality (wiki)." He must have forgot to read the portion of the act that states "Nothing in this Act...shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses of, the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

The opposition also makes the claim that this act creates a special class of victims and goes against the equal protection under the law. You know, just because you are of a different stock and singled out, you are obvs not speshul.

Rantmobile Racing Times -

Mostly this just makes me sad, that something like this would be oppossed. It breaks my heart that something like this is needed to aid in the prevention of people being harmed. People had to die in order to bring to light the dark things that people do to one another because of something so trivial as their orientation, gender identities, gender, etc. It makes me upset that people use their religious morals and what not to deny a group of people that don't fit into their idea of what the world should be like protection under the law. I suppose I am extremely naive/uneducated or whatever to think that the purpose of religion isn't to use it to justify your hate.

You may think that these acts passing are a step in the right direction, and for the most part, they are. It is also a sad thing that we actually need these types of laws because some people can't get it through their heads that it's not ok to harm someone based on something that isn't any of their business.

/rant. What do you all think of this? Do you know anyone that has ever been assaulted or name called because of their differences? Have you? I hope not. If you do, share and maybe we can all dispense hugs on the internet.