Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee is not moving to end free speech for White people

AProudLefty

AProudLefty

The remora of JPP
Contributor
H. R. 61

To prevent and prosecute white supremacy inspired hate crime and conspiracy to commit white supremacy inspired hate crime and to amend title 18, United States Code, to expand the scope of hate crimes.

“Leading Against White Supremacy Act of 2023”

In general.—A person engages in a white supremacy inspired hate crime when white supremacy ideology has motivated the planning, development, preparation, or perpetration of actions that constituted a crime or were undertaken in furtherance of activity that, if effectuated, would have constituted a crime.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/61/text/ih?overview=closed&format=xml

As usual, Earl lied. Is it a tacit admission that he is a white supremacist or endorses them?

Poor Earl.

Earl said:
Congressional Racist Black Democrat moves to end free speech for White people.

Texas Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee, who represents one of the most racially gerrymandered districts in the entire country, has introduced legislation to Congress that would end free speech for white people in the United States, creating a new type of speech-based federal “hate crime” that only white people can be charged with.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s “Leading Against White Supremacy Act of 2023” which, as the name suggests, would only be enforced against white people, makes it illegal for white people to question open-borders immigration, advocate for preserving America’s culture and traditional demographic make-up, or even criticize minorities.

Racism out in the open, what a shame



https://nationalfile.com/congressional-democrat-moves-to-end-free-speech-for-white-people/
Click to expand...

Lies, lies and more lies.
 
Earl said:
Congressional Democrat Moves to End Free Speech for White People

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee has introduced legislation that will charge white people with federal "hate crimes" for questioning immigration, or criticizing non-whites.
Click to expand...

Lies, lies and more lies.
 
Earl said:
Specifically, Jackson Lee targets Americans who are in favor of border security, calling out “replacement theory” by name, an ideology that holds that open borders and mass migration into the Western World are part of a deliberate effort to “replace” white people in their native lands.
Click to expand...

Lies, lies and more lies.
 
AProudLefty said:
H. R. 61

To prevent and prosecute white supremacy inspired hate crime and conspiracy to commit white supremacy inspired hate crime and to amend title 18, United States Code, to expand the scope of hate crimes.

“Leading Against White Supremacy Act of 2023”

In general.—A person engages in a white supremacy inspired hate crime when white supremacy ideology has motivated the planning, development, preparation, or perpetration of actions that constituted a crime or were undertaken in furtherance of activity that, if effectuated, would have constituted a crime.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/61/text/ih?overview=closed&format=xml

As usual, Earl lied. Is it a tacit admission that he is a white supremacist or endorses them?

Poor Earl.



Lies, lies and more lies.
Click to expand...

Agreed Captain Earl, ex-USAF, is a fucking moron and a racist. His comment “most racially gerrymandered districts” proves his idiocy by the mere fact that Republicans are in charge of gerrymandering in Texas.

That said, Jackson’s bill does appear to be racist in that it singles out Americans by race. Better, IMO, to promote both tolerance and seek to eliminate groups that promote racial hatred be it Earl’s WSE friends, Black Separatists or any other group that seeks to divide Americans by race, religion, ancestral origin or any other divisive measure.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Agreed Captain Earl, ex-USAF, is a fucking moron and a racist. His comment “most racially gerrymandered districts” proves his idiocy by the mere fact that Republicans are in charge of gerrymandering in Texas.

That said, Jackson’s bill does appear to be racist in that it singles out Americans by race. Better, IMO, to promote both tolerance and seek to eliminate groups that promote racial hatred be it Earl’s WSE friends, Black Separatists or any other group that seeks to divide Americans by race, religion, ancestral origin or any other divisive measure.
Click to expand...

Perhaps but the white supremacists are a danger to America. Those other groups aren't.
 
AProudLefty said:
H. R. 61

To prevent and prosecute white supremacy inspired hate crime and conspiracy to commit white supremacy inspired hate crime and to amend title 18, United States Code, to expand the scope of hate crimes.

“Leading Against White Supremacy Act of 2023”

In general.—A person engages in a white supremacy inspired hate crime when white supremacy ideology has motivated the planning, development, preparation, or perpetration of actions that constituted a crime or were undertaken in furtherance of activity that, if effectuated, would have constituted a crime.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/61/text/ih?overview=closed&format=xml

As usual, Earl lied. Is it a tacit admission that he is a white supremacist or endorses them?

Poor Earl.



Lies, lies and more lies.
Click to expand...

Prove it.
 
AProudLefty said:
Perhaps but the white supremacists are a danger to America. Those other groups aren't.
Click to expand...
Any group that promotes hatred is a danger to democracy. It’s a fine line as demonstrated by the Nazis marching in Skokie. They promote hatred, bias and dividing Americans. This is different from groups that promote social justice and equality.

Better, IMO, to define why White Supremacists are a danger without using racial terms. Not a lawyer but phrases like “promotes violence or criminal actions” or “seeks to violate Constitutional rights of Americans” is better, IMO, than racially loaded terms like “white supremacist ideology”.

If our national leadership is going to go through the effort and cost to pass and enforce legislation across the Land, then it should be in compliance with our Constitution. Singling people out by race or racial ideology isn’t in compliance with the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause, IMO.
 
AProudLefty said:
I provided the link to the bill
Click to expand...

Ok do you see any problems with this from your link?

"(a) In General.—A person engages in a white supremacy inspired hate crime when white supremacy ideology has motivated the planning, development, preparation, or perpetration of actions that constituted a crime or were undertaken in furtherance of activity that, if effectuated, would have constituted a crime."
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Any group that promotes hatred is a danger to democracy. It’s a fine line as demonstrated by the Nazis marching in Skokie. They promote hatred, bias and dividing Americans. This is different from groups that promote social justice and equality.

Better, IMO, to define why White Supremacists are a danger without using racial terms. Not a lawyer but phrases like “promotes violence or criminal actions” or “seeks to violate Constitutional rights of Americans” is better, IMO, than racially loaded terms like “white supremacist ideology”.

If our national leadership is going to go through the effort and cost to pass and enforce legislation across the Land, then it should be in compliance with our Constitution. Singling people out by race or racial ideology isn’t in compliance with the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause, IMO.
Click to expand...

Hate speech is not a hate crime.
 
Yakuda said:
Ok do you see any problems with this from your link?

"(a) In General.—A person engages in a white supremacy inspired hate crime when white supremacy ideology has motivated the planning, development, preparation, or perpetration of actions that constituted a crime or were undertaken in furtherance of activity that, if effectuated, would have constituted a crime."
Click to expand...

First you tell me what your problem with it is.
 
AProudLefty said:
Hate speech is not a hate crime.
Click to expand...
Agreed. However, it’s one thing to say “I hate monarchist cocksuckers” and it’s another to advocate violence against monarchist cocksuckers. Not a lawyer so I don’t know exactly where the dividing line exists but can understand if it varies by state and Federal law.

Still, a major problem with eliminating racism in America is by our nation’s penchant to institutionalize racism with laws like Jackson is advocating. IMO, her proposal doesn’t pass a Constitutional test on free speech.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top