Purveyors of ‘ex-gay’ therapy, Exodus International says it’s shutting down
Holder, Kerry honor LGBT staffers at pride events at Justice, State departments
A note to the parents seeking to devastate their 15 year-old daughter and her 18 year-old girlfriend
Marriage equality advocates hope to repeal Florida’s ban on gay marriage
Del. gender identity protections bill clears final legislative vote
Four sentenced to prison in kidnapping, attack on gay man in Ky.
ACLU sues Ind. motor vehicles bureau over gay youth group license plates
CINCINNATI, Ohio — A federal appeals court on Thursday rejected a lawsuit brought by three Michigan pastors challenging the constitutionality of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled the Act — which imposes harsher punishments for individuals who commit violent acts on individuals due to their sexual orientation — was constitutional, and did not suppress anti-gay speech.
The suit was first filed in February 2010 by the conservative Thomas More Law Center, four months after President Barack Obama signed the legislation into law in October 2009.
Plaintiffs Gary Glenn, head of the American Family Association of Michigan, and pastors Levon Yuille, René B. Ouellette and James Combs had argued the law would lead to their criminal prosecution for expressing anti-gay religious beliefs, in violation of the First Amendment.
In the filing, the plaintiffs cited bible passages and quoted from novelist George Orwell’s “Animal Farm,” claiming the Shepard-Byrd Act treated certain individuals “more equal than others,” and said that the intent of the act was to “eradicate religious beliefs opposing the homosexual agenda.”
In their ruling today, the Court said that the plaintiffs had “not alleged any actual intent” to cause bodily injury to any gay individuals, and pointed out that the pastors explicitly denounced “crimes of violence perpetrated against innocent individuals.”
The Hate Crimes Act, the appeals court ruled, “does not prohibit Plaintiffs’ proposed course of speech” and said they “can’t quite pinpoint what it is they want to say that could subject them to prosecution under the Hate Crimes Act.”
The court acknowledged that should the plaintiffs, all pastors, quote the biblical passage Leviticus 20:13, which calls for men who have sex with one another to be put to death, “they have not alleged any intention to do more than merely quote it,” which is not unlawful under the provisions of the Shepard-Bryd Act.
“If the Hate Crimes Act prohibits only willfully causing bodily injury and Plaintiffs are not planning to willfully injure anybody, then what is their complaint? Plaintiffs answer that they fear wrongful prosecution and conviction under the Act. Not only is that fear misplaced, it’s inadequate to generate a case or controversy the federal courts can hear,” the appeals court ruled.
Glenn did not respond to a request from LGBTQ Nation for comment on today’s ruling.
Filed under: National Headlines
Eldest of ‘19 Kids and Counting’ joins anti-gay hate group FRC
Rubio: ‘I’m done’ with immigration bill if gay couples are included
Marco Rubio: No ‘special’ rights for gay Americans — but I’m not ‘a bigot’
Brazil lawmakers OK bill to allow treatment of homosexuality as a disorder
Christian college expels lesbian, wants her to repay grant money
Lesbian may be forced to testify against spouse in Ky. murder case
Mugabe vows to strengthen penalties against gays: ‘They should rot in jail’
Man pleads not guilty in New York City hate crime shooting
Russia to ban adoption by same-sex couples
E.W. Jackson: Using my past anti-gay statements against me is ‘persecution’
Tucson becomes second Arizona city to allow same-sex civil unions
At LGBT Pride reception, Obama urges ban on workplace bias against gays
‘M’ or ‘F’? Outdated IDs worry transgender people
that’s crazy
With the election of Mitt Romney, once again we will abide by the WILL of the people NOT the sensibilities of the churlish, ordinary few, underwritten by the privileged, insulated micro-minority prominent in the media (Anderson Cooper)that emerge as unhinged as they unloose streams of peevish diatribe. Regardless of how hard they try to be the NEW oppressed; there are no are no NEW rights to be afforded to Homophiles or the Sapphic.
Of course not, that’s unconstitutional. If it did, it should also prohibit anti-religious speech, anti-Black speech, anti-White speech, anti-shoes speech, anti-flip flops speech, anti-coke speech, anti-pepsi speech, and every other “anti-” speech out there! Just to be fair.
I’m sorry, but it goes against the whole Freedom of speech thing. Which in America is pretty limited, granted, but it does still apply. Believe me, I wish people were more tolerant, but that’s just the way it is. Law and justice are not the same
Great ruling by the court! Money Quote: “If the Hate Crimes Act prohibits only willfully causing bodily injury and Plaintiffs are not planning to willfully injure anybody, then what is their complaint? Plaintiffs answer that they fear wrongful prosecution and conviction under the Act. Not only is that fear misplaced, it’s inadequate to generate a case or controversy the federal courts can hear,” the appeals court ruled.
seriously im gay and dont even care
^^^^ high horse alert!
you cant arrrest someone for calling you a faggot, you deal with it. when youre attacked physicalls, thats when shit gets serious, but if you cant handle a name you seriously should be home schooled and stay home forever
The pastor’s came after us for this? How ridiculous! Get a life and a brain!
It Should Also Cover Anti-LGBT Hate Speech’s…Word’s Are The Worst Form Of Hate…When People Say Hateful Words To Me Or About Me, Especially When It Comes To My Gender Identity Or My Sexual Orientation…I Just Open A Barrel Of Whoop Ass On Them…!!!.
I agree with this. If should be able to call someone a fag out of pure hatred. This would fall under the 1st. I would find it stupid that marching preaching about how God hates fags but it would be okay to have Neo-Nazi and KKK rallies on capital buildings.
Unless they are openly advocating violence, anti-gay speech SHOULD be protected.
“In the filing, the plaintiffs cited bible passages and quoted from novelist George Orwell’s “Animal Farm,” claiming the Shepard-Byrd Act treated certain individuals “more equal than others,” and said that the intent of the act was to “eradicate religious beliefs opposing the homosexual agenda.””
I totally headdesked at that part. Well okay, more like somewhere between a headdesk and a Jean-Luc Picard facepalm, because I didn’t want to hurt my head.
… SO: can-WE-also speak H8FULLY of JEWS-&-BLACKS?!?
Educate gay’s on Christopher steet.
^ Yes, unless you are calling for violence against them, you have the right to speak hatefully towards anyone you like.
As much as I hate anti-gay speech, people have a right to express their views. I think these hateful comments can lead to harm, but at the same time I see the other side’s point of view. Promoting or advocating for violence is a separate thing…
Dear Three Michigan Pastors:
The Federal appeals court can save you neither from your hatred nor from your ignorance.
Love and Kisses,
The Constitution of The United States of America
Free speech helps us identify who the morons are.
As bad as it sounds folks, it is constitutionally the right thing to do. Unless someone intructs people to commit a crime against someone it is free speech. That being said, they have the right to be bigots and we have the right to call them hate-mongering bible thumping batshit asshats. #FreeSpeechWinning
As I’ve said many times..we have the god given right as Americans to be assholes if we wish lol
yes they have a right to be bigots best part is it does not protect them from the backlash results of their words
oh god they’re stupid. The bill doesn’t interfere with the freedom of speech. It protects the LGBT community from getting the shit beaten out of them. Dumbasses….
That’s what America is all about. The right to be foolish and make it known through speech. Have fun…..
Brad, until you learn to make sense, keep your comments to yourself!
WTF?!
Well it SHOULD, dammit!
Brad, how ta hell do YOU know that Twit Rawknee will be elected?? Do you know something we don’t? Don’t count your chickens before they hatch, man
How sad is it that it is three pastors who sued to remove the hate crimes law. They sued saying hate speech would be prohibit? That was their concern? Pastors wanting to make sure they can spew hatred. Where are all the real christians hiding in this country?
so with that being said, if I go up to one of those inbred fundie bigot white trash “pastors” and tell him specifically what I think of him and his kind, it’s protected by the Constitution too, right?
Federal Laws are bullshit…they want to take our freedom away and think they can treat a group of people however they want to and think we should have to PAY THEM for our lack of freedom and equality!!!
So if they quote this horrible quote and inspire one of their congregation to act out the quote will they be held accountable as accomplices? I would certainly hope so!
Bullshit.