Barney Frank calling names

[vurbano]

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45432


Barney Frank: Antonin Scalia is a ‘Homophobe’
Friday, March 20, 2009
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer




Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) (Photo: CNSNews.com)(CNSNews.com) – Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said in an interview Friday on 365gay.com that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is a “homophobe.”

“At some point, [the Defense of Marriage Act] is going to have to go to the United States Supreme Court,” Frank said. “I wouldn’t want it to go to the United States Supreme Court now because that homophobe Antonin Scalia has too many votes on this current court.”

Frank also said in the interview that he thinks President Barack Obama will reverse the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the U.S. military.

“Absolutely,” Frank said, concerning the policy.

Frank also predicted that Obama and a Democratic majority in Congress will pass three pro-homosexual laws in the coming months and years, including the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) that bans workplace discrimination because of sexual orientation; a hate crimes law for individuals who have had sex-change surgery; and a law to allow homosexuals to serve “openly” in the military.

“I think we will have the votes to pass ENDA, to pass hate crimes (law), and to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” Frank said in the video-interview.

[Madtown HD Junkie]

Barney Frank is a joke. The guy should be investigated for his involvement in Fannie & Freddy.

[cybok0]

a hate crimes law for individuals who have had sex-change surgery

I never understood why if someone beats up a gay person, they get more punishment than if they beat up a straight person.

I don't think it's right.

[dantheman77]

ok. how do the adds work on this site?? i click on this site and at top is a add for a gay dateing web site. ( good kuck V) btw. smile in wrong place

[vurbano]

ok. how do the adds work on this site?? i click on this site and at top is a add for a gay dateing web site. ( good kuck V) btw. smile in wrong place

Im not the one asking how it works.

[froggigger]

I never understood why if someone beats up a gay person, they get more punishment than if they beat up a straight person.

I don't think it's right.

Something we can agree on. In effect, it's criminalizing thought. A judge and jury is allowed to determine what a person was thinking when the crime was committed. It's lunacy.

[Skyhi]

A judge and jury is allowed to determine what a person was thinking when the crime was committed. It's lunacy.

That is done everyday when a jury determines a defendant's state of mind when deciding if a killer is 1st/2nd degree murder/manslaughter, etc.

[vurbano]

That is done everyday when a jury determines a defendant's state of mind when deciding if a killer is 1st/2nd degree murder/manslaughter, etc.

You couldnt be more wrong. A jury looks at evidence that indicates whether it was premeditated etc when deciding what grade of murder it was. Doesnt matter if they "think" someone may hate negroes or not.

[Skyhi]

Yes. The jury looks at evidence to determine what the defendant was thinking before she commited murder.

Froggigger said it was lunacy that a judge/jury is allowed to determine what a person was thinking when a crime is comenced. I'm saying that they do it everyday in the context of homicide.

[cybok0]

Something we can agree on.:eek::surprised-004::danger:

[Bear Paws]

ok. how do the adds work on this site?? i click on this site and at top is a add for a gay dateing web site. ( good kuck V) btw. smile in wrong place It locks on key words in the post text from its data base and puts up a match. The other day a recruiting ad with a women in a berka for a Muslim Mosk came up on the key word "Muslim" in the post..

[msmith198025]

I never understood why if someone beats up a gay person, they get more punishment than if they beat up a straight person.

I don't think it's right.

Nor do I. Assault is assault.

[HDRoberts]

I never understood why if someone beats up a gay person, they get more punishment than if they beat up a straight person.

I don't think it's right.

Agreed.

[vurbano]

Yes. The jury looks at evidence to determine what the defendant was thinking before she commited murder..with a brain scan? what are they? god? They look at actions and evidence.

[Skyhi]

with a brain scan? what are they? god? They look at actions and evidence.

They look at evidence to determine the defendant's state of mind AKA what the D was thinking.

[dantheman77]

It locks on key words in the post text from its data base and puts up a match. The other day a recruiting ad with a women in a berka for a Muslim Mosk came up on the key word "Muslim" in the post..

wow. ok thanks. thats kind of funny. a thread on barney gets gay sites.

[froggigger]

Yes. The jury looks at evidence to determine what the defendant was thinking before she commited murder.

Froggigger said it was lunacy that a judge/jury is allowed to determine what a person was thinking when a crime is comenced. I'm saying that they do it everyday in the context of homicide.

In the context of homicide, it's intent, not thought. Was it planned? Was it spur of the moment? Was it an accident? The hate crime aspect doesn't enter the picture unless the crime is committed against someone in a protected group. In any event, hate crime legislation is unnecessary.

[Skyhi]

In the context of homicide, it's intent, not thought.

What do you think intent is? :)

According to Black's Law dictionary it's a "mental desire and will to act in a particular way." Now in order to determine what an individual's "mental desire" is, a jury will have to hear evidence to determine the individual's thought processes.

Back to my original point - - judges and juries make inquires with respect to Defendants' though processes (what they were thinking) everyday.

[froggigger]

What do you think intent is? :)

According to Black's Law dictionary it's a "mental desire and will to act in a particular way." Now in order to determine what an individual's "mental desire" is, a jury will have to hear evidence to determine the individual's thought processes.

Back to my original point - - judges and juries make inquires with respect to Defendants' though processes (what they were thinking) everyday.

That's a broad brush. Thought is involved in every action, criminal or not. Judges do not look at thought per se, but actions and intent. Granted, actions and intent take thought, but hate crime laws take it a step further. If a defendant intentionally selects a victim "because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person," then he can be charged with a hate crime.

Sounds reasonable on the surface but what if a slimeball mugs an elderly woman using a walker? She was chosen because she was a woman and also disabled. Does preying on the vulnerable make the mugging a hate crime? Since sexual predators choose their victims based on gender, should all sexual crimes be hate crimes prosecuted by the Feds?

Criminal acts are already criminal acts. What should matter most is the act itself. Crime needs to be punished to the fullest extent of the law, and who the victim was or what the perp was thinking makes no difference. In a nutshell, criminals should be prosecuted for what they've done, not what they believe.

"...the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions" --Thomas Jefferson

[vurbano]

Until a mind reading machine is invented, someones thoughts are not going to stand up in court. You can accuse someone of thinking a certain way about a group of people but only actions count. Planning etc. prove premeditation or conspiracy. Hate crime laws are a load of crap created by out of control NAACP and GAY activists. I do not see how its applicale unless I burn a cross in the victims yard before haging him from a tree. That is a hate crime. The rest is bunk.