bob x
Well-Known Member
No, unless it IS speech which is about the crime of violence in question. Either you are incapable of reading, or you are simply incapable of speaking truth without twisting words. This clause is all about EXCLUDING "hate speech" from being introduced into a case, even if under the existing laws it would have been considered relevant evidence; it is an alteration of the original text of the statute, even though the original statute had nothing to do with "hate speech" in the first place, in an attempt to satisfy people like you; but there is no satisfying you, obviously, so it was a wasted effort.Unless you think it is related to the crime.
That's a flatout lie, which does not become any truer for being often repeated. The perpetrators were entirely explicit throughout the trial that they killed Matthew Sheperd for his sexuality; the only basis of the defense was that they had a "right" to kill him, supposedly for coming on to them.And it has come to light that this crime was not a hate crime against an homosexual to begin with.
Liar. You will not even address me by name, what is up with that?Anyway, Box, I have no hate against you.
At one point I was willing to assume that you have just been lied to, over and over, until you can't believe anything else, but it is becoming clear that you are an intentional liar. You cannot speak the truth because no truth is in you. You are of the Father of Lies, who was a murderer from the beginning, and the works of your father you do.
I have not mistreated you in any way. I am sick to death of Christians who think no-one is allowed to disagree with them or tell them when they are in the wrong.I would appreciate that you stop mistreating me.