About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Robertson ignores existing law in attacking hate crimes bill, can't imagine protection for religious beliefs

October 28, 2009 8:37 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

From the U.S. Department of Justice:

The portion of Section 245 of Title 18 which is primarily enforced by the Criminal Section makes it unlawful to willfully injure, intimidate or interfere with any person, or to attempt to do so, by force or threat of force, because of that other person's race, color, religion or national origin and because of his/her activity as one of the following:

  • A student at or applicant for admission to a public school or public college
  • A participant in a benefit, service, privilege, program, facility or activity provided or administered by a state or local government
  • An applicant for private or state employment; a private or state employee; a member or applicant for membership in a labor organization or hiring hall; or an applicant for employment through an employment agency, labor organization or hiring hall
  • A juror or prospective juror in state court
  • A traveler or user of a facility of interstate commerce or common carrier
  • A patron of a public accommodation or place of exhibition or entertainment, including hotels, motels, restaurants, lunchrooms, bars, gas stations, theaters, concert halls, sports arenas or stadiums.

This statute also prohibits wilful interference, by force or threat of force, with a person because he/she is or was participating in, or aiding or encouraging other persons to participate in any of the benefits or activities listed above without discrimination as to race, color, religion, or national origin.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by soze169880 (October 28, 2009 8:47 pm ET)
      4 1
      When a partisan con man like Robertson still has his tax-exempt status, it's a bit rich of him to be whining about gummint persecution.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by johnrod10 (October 29, 2009 12:05 am ET)
          6
        What do partisan and tax-exempt have to do w/ anything. Isnt MMFA tax-exempt?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by soze169880 (October 29, 2009 12:36 am ET)
          3 1
          Religious organizations are supposed to lose their tax exemption if they're overtly partisan. Of course, this is blatantly ignored most of the time, as demonstrated by Robertson. Nice attempt at tu quoque, though. Fail.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (October 29, 2009 1:36 am ET)
          1  
          One can be philosophically partisan and be okay. One cannot be partisan for a political philosophy and remain tax exempt.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by DellDolly (October 29, 2009 1:38 am ET)
            1  
            I should have said for a political party. You can believe in liberal philosophy and be okay, but you can't support Democratic candidates or lobby for Democratic initiatives on behalf of the party or a political candidate.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by terrapin53 (October 28, 2009 11:06 pm ET)
      4 1
      senility does that to you.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Boxer1979 (October 29, 2009 5:37 pm ET)
         
      Robertson ignores existing law in attacking hate crimes bill, can't imagine protection for religious beliefs

      NOOOO! Just from your beliefs Patty.
      Report Abuse