Federal Hate Crime Law Withstands Legal Challenge
You have no standing; unless of course you are planning violence against gays or other minorities, in which case this law should apply.
Once again, the sky is falling for opponents of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act as they learned their irrational fears are unfounded. Yesterday, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals released an opinion that found three Michigan pastors without sufficient standing to challenge the constitutionality of the federal hate crime law. The opinion dismissed the plaintiff’s challenge as “a political statement.”
Simply put, the three plaintiffs believe that being gay is “forbidden by God” and that it is their duty to “publicly denounce homosexuality, homosexual activism, and the homosexual agenda as being contrary to God’s law.” They filed the lawsuit because they were concerned that the federal hate crime law prohibits them from espousing their form of hate.
According to the court, they are wrong. The opinion states:
So why are Plaintiffs here? If the Hate Crimes Act prohibits only willfully causing bodily injury and Plaintiffs are not planning to willfully injure anybody, then what is their complaint? Plaintiffs answer that they fear wrongful prosecution and conviction under the Act. Not only is that fear misplaced, it’s inadequate to generate a case or controversy the federal courts can hear.
and here you can see hate group leader Tony Perkins, trying to explain how in the hateverse protecting LGBT rights is equivalent to child indoctrination and Christian persecution: