U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-10-2009, 06:57 AM
 
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
14,089 posts, read 25,856,756 times
Reputation: 8027

Advertisements

Video - Democrats Protect Pedophiles - Politics

Even though military veterans have been attacked simply for being in the military, Democrats refuse to add them to the hate crimes protection but continue to protect pedophiles. Nice.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-10-2009, 07:59 AM
 
Location: Neither here nor there
14,810 posts, read 15,112,421 times
Reputation: 32968
That's why the hate crimes bill is also called "The Pedophile Protection Act".
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 08:05 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
8,387 posts, read 8,882,198 times
Reputation: 4070
I'm a veteran. I've never been attacked for being in the military. If I ever was, I'm confident I'd be able to navigate the situation w/o having hurt feelings. I think most veterans could.

You can relax now,
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 08:59 AM
 
Location: Central Illinois -
25,943 posts, read 17,301,642 times
Reputation: 20342
These are some pretty disgusting accusations to make, and while you might hide behind accusations like these, only those who dwell in sewers believe them. It separates thinking people from those of us who abdicated the responsibility to lunatic fringe rightwing nutjobs.

The sewers are full of them
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 09:16 AM
 
1,619 posts, read 2,623,253 times
Reputation: 1360
Not for a minute do I believe pedophiles are protected, regardless of stating Democrats or Republicans; what does, in my opinion, protect pedophiles, although protect is a questionable word, is the system itself. There not only needs to be consistent rules and regulations about, for example, getting names into the sex offender registries, but equally if not more important, is getting them registered in a very timely manner.

Some states have more specific registries than others, i.e., names, addresses, and continued follow-up; othe states do not whether it is because of who/what agency specifically enters their names and what agency does the follow-ups to make sure they are not only registered but makes sure that if they move, their new addresses are put into the database.

I believe when the politics are removed from the process, the flow will be easier. I believe that when an offender is being release from prison, and before or simultaneously to being connected with their probation officer, DOC should take the extra 5 minutes, along with all the other paperwork that goes with the release, and enter their name immediately. When that offender meets the first time with their probation officer, that probation officer must enter the updated information in the database, as the offender would now have their new addresses, phone number, etc. Total time: 20 mins between DOC and P&P, give or take.

One of my friends has a son who was raped, at knifepoint and it took almost three years to get the offender into the sex offender registry. The offender was prosecuted, incarcerated and there is no excuse, in my opinion, for a data base entry to take three years. That, is egregious and totally unacceptable.

I have learned that too often, most often legislation is created as a reaction to something rather than taking a proactive stance; why not implement a process which makes sense, is still cost-effective and practical.

This is not a Democratic/Republican position but rather simply a common sense one and there are mechanisms that can be put into place that work effectively. Perhaps we should write to our representatives and suggest that they act responsibily, sensibly and put aside the politics for this type of issue. It is important.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Reading, PA
4,059 posts, read 4,144,520 times
Reputation: 842
From http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE...&pageId=97095:
Quote:
If a mother hears that their child has been raped and she slaps the assailant with her purse, she is now gone after as a hate criminal because this is a protected class. There are other protected classes in here. I mean simple exhibitionism. I have female friends who have told me over the years that some guy flashed them, and their immediate reaction was to hit them with their purse. Well now, he's committed a misdemeanor, [and] she has committed a federal hate crime because the exhibitionism is protected under sexual orientation.
Here's the problem with that argument: If that mother or female friend did those things, it would be in retaliation for acts committed by the person she attacked. That's not a hate crime. A hate crime would be if I attacked a person because at some time the other person had raped someone or flashed someone and I was just going to get my licks. A hate crime is attacking someone because of what he is, not because of what he did. We have no right or moral obligation to go on vigilanti attacks on people who are or have done things we don't like -- even if they have committed illegal acts. Rapists and pedophiles are among us, they may or may not have been punished by the legal system. No one has or should have the right to make random attacks on them.

This argument is a real perversion of what a hate crime is. And another example of language manipulation to make people believe something that isn't true.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 09:41 AM
 
3,553 posts, read 7,335,898 times
Reputation: 2340
BOGUS THREAD, BOGUS THREAD, BOGUS THREAD, BOGUS THREAD_____

Come on people, look at the source, wnd. This has been a Drudge/Limbaugh/O'Reilly/hannity talking point for about a week. Is there anyone (other than the truly disturbed) who actually believes this? Sheesh, I'm starting to long for more "birther" and teleprompter threads.

golfgod
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2009, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Earth
24,629 posts, read 26,560,989 times
Reputation: 11372
The op strts these bogus threads on a regular basis.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2009, 06:03 PM
 
1,619 posts, read 2,623,253 times
Reputation: 1360
It is disheartening to think that this topic, initially, would be such a ruse...and, on top of it, melding two separate, distinct AND seriously egregious actions together, under the umbrella of 'politics'. There is enough political issues to get into an "engaging" conversation, however, hate crimes AND pedophiles are not, nor should they be political issues but rather serious legal, ethical and moral issues. The only umbrella both should be under is the Judicial arena, not a red/blue umbrella.

We can hate/abhor pedophiles but that is not what constitutes a hate crime; there may be different viewpoints on how to best punish offenders of hate crimes and pedophiles. I am a firm believer in making sure that if there is any question whatsoever as to what a word means, and I am not being flippant nor disrespectful to anyone, the initial action is to look it up in a dictionary or on line. Once a word or term is defined, it is much easier to be clear(er) about a term and thus, how it can/should be used.

The dictionary defines a hate crime as "any of various crimes... when motivated by hostility to the victim as a member of a group (as one based on color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation)." ......Current legislation allows federal prosecution of a hate crime only if the crime was motivated by race, religion, national origin, or color. In addition, the assailant must intend to prevent the victim from exercising a federally protected right. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999, passed by the Senate in July 1999, seeks to expand federal jurisdiction over these crimes.

With this broad definition of hate crimes, it does not appear to me, at least by my interpretation of the above, that being attacked for being in the military seems to fly...

And, as far as as "protecting pedophiles" goes, I think that is way off base...we are implementing tougher and tougher laws throughout the country; states are working hard to pass civil confinement laws..and just to add to that tidbit, Dems and Reps alike are working collaboratively to get those laws enacted.

I think it is great to toss out controversial topics, keeps us on our toes, keeps our synapses connecting, , however, I don't think it is constructive at all, to make statements that not only do not make sense but are not true. We live in a difficult enough time that we don't need to fuel to any smoldering fires as it is. Just my thoughts!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2009, 06:13 PM
 
13,180 posts, read 14,013,053 times
Reputation: 4542
Media Matters has debunked this B.S

O'Reilly smears hate crimes bill with false claim that pedophiles could be protected | Media Matters for America
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top