My thoughts on Rep. Virginia Foxx and Hate Crimes Bill-gate

I saw this Meme burning up the Blogosphere last night. I was way too tired to try blogging on it last night. I have been, as of late, getting my sleeping habits straightened out.

It seems that Rep. Virginia Foxx made a speech yesterday on the House floor about a hate crimes bill, that is winding it’s way through Congress. Here is the speech in question:

Transcript:

I also would like to point out that there was a bill — the hate crimes bill that’s called the Matthew Shepard bill is named after a very unfortunate incident that happened where a young man was killed, but we know that that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery. It wasn’t because he was gay.”

“This — the bill was named for him, hate crimes bill was named for him, but it’s really a hoax that that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills.

Well, the Liberal funded and far left Media Matters for America is raising a tizzy about this. They and many other liberal groups and Gay Rights groups claim that Matthew Shepard was murdered because he was gay. Thier basis for this? This right here:

Detective: “They Knew Damn Well He Was Gay.” The Slate article went on to report: “According to detectives who interviewed both of the convicted murderers, there is no evidence that Shepard made any sexual advances to the pair — and the detectives dismissed the idea that the murder was the mere result of a robbery gone bad. ‘Far from that!’ scoffed Sgt. Rob DeBree, the chief investigator in the case. ‘They knew damn well he was gay … It started out as a robbery and burglary, and I sincerely believe the other activity was because he was gay.'” [Slate.com, 11/6/99; emphasis added]

However, the problem is that is this right here: (H/T to Sister Toldjah)

Unfortunately for them, Rep. Foxx was correct … according to an ABC report from 2004 in which the killers – Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson – were interviewed, along with various witnesses, law enforcement officials, and Cal Rerucha, the prosecutor. I’ve emphasized the most relevant parts of the story:

Shepard’s Friends Suspect Attack Was Hate-Motivated

Just hours after Shepard’s battered body was discovered, and before anyone knew who had beaten him, Shepard’s friends Walt Boulden and Alex Trout began spreading the word that Shepard was openly gay and that they were concerned the attack may have been a gay-bashing.

Boulden told “20/20? in an interview shortly after the attack in 1998, “I know in the core of my heart it happened because he revealed he was gay. And it’s chilling. They targeted him because he was gay.”

Prosecutor Rerucha recalls that Shepard’s friends also contacted his office. Rerucha told “20/20,” “They were calling the County Attorney’s office, they were calling the media and indicating Matthew Shepard is gay and we don’t want the fact that he is gay to go unnoticed.”

Helping fuel the gay hate crime theory were statements made to police and the media by Kristen Price, McKinney’s girlfriend. (Price was charged with felony accessory after-the-fact to first-degree murder. She later pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of misdemeanor interference with police officers.)

Price now says that at the time of the crime she thought things would go easier for McKinney if his violence were seen as a panic reaction to an unwanted gay sexual advance.

But today, Price tells Vargas the initial statements she made were not true and tells Vargas that McKinney’s motive was money and drugs. “I don’t think it was a hate crime at all. I never did,” she said.

Former Laramie Police Detective Ben Fritzen, one of the lead investigators in the case, also believed robbery was the primary motive. “Matthew Shepard’s sexual preference or sexual orientation certainly wasn’t the motive in the homicide,” he said.

“If it wasn’t Shepard, they would have found another easy target. What it came down to really is drugs and money and two punks that were out looking for it,” Fritzen said.

‘All I Wanted to Do Was Beat Him Up and Rob Him’

Asked directly whether he targeted and attacked Shepard because he was gay, McKinney told Vargas, “No. I did not. … I would say it wasn’t a hate crime. All I wanted to do was beat him up and rob him.”

But if the attackers were just trying to rob someone to get a drug fix, why did they beat Shepard so savagely?

Rerucha attributes McKinney’s rage and his savage beating of Shepard to his drug abuse. “The methamphetamine just fueled to this point where there was no control. It was a horrible, horrible, horrible murder. It was a murder that was once again driven by drugs,” Rerucha said.

Dr. Rick Rawson, a professor at UCLA who has studied the link between methamphetamine and violence, tells “20/20? the drug can trigger episodes of violent behavior.

“In the first weeks after you’ve stopped using it, the kinds of triggers that can set off an episode are completely unpredictable. It can be: you say a word with the wrong inflection, you touch someone on the shoulder. It’s completely unpredictable as to what will set somebody off” Rawson said.

“If Aaron McKinney had not become involved with methamphetamine, Matthew Shepard would be alive today,” Rerucha said.

So, basically, what you have here, is the liberals taking the words of a Detective and a few other idiots over the words of the prosecutors. But that really is not the point of all this. The point really is about the law that is attempting to be passed through the House. Jazz shaw over at the moderate voice, makes a very good point on this Law:

The larger issue, though, is found in the 14th Amendment.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

(Emphasis mine.) Long story short: When you pass laws which assign greater guilt to certain parties for committing the same crimes, based on nothing more than what they were thinking at the time and the “class” of citizens who were the victims, then you are providing unequal protection of the laws. You are assigning a higher value to the lives, liberty and property of some victims than others based on their sexual orientation, their race, skin color, religion, etc.

Sadly, we have no elected leaders with the will to drive these questions home in the halls of Congress and I’d be shocked if we have any justices on the bench who will call these laws out for what they are.

You see, what these Liberals are trying to do, is get bills passed that violates our Constitution. See what I put in Bold an underlined text up there? When the Federal Government goes in a tries to tell someone, “Hey, you killed this person, and he was gay, that’s a hate crime and we’re going to punish you harder”, that is a violation of our Constitution. If we open the door for gays; we will have have bills for everyone else too. Pretty soon, you will have bills for Blacks, Jews, Women and everything else under the sun. Our nation’s laws should be uniform for everyone and no harder or softer for any particular class of people.