Controversial hate crimes law effective Jan. 1

By SIMONE CARR

In spite of weeks of pleading and protests by Christian organizations and individuals, Gov. Schwarzennegger signed bill SB-1234 on Sept. 22, leaving many Christians wondering, “Now what?”

Basically, it is not a new bill, but an update of an already existing hate-crimes legislation. It includes clearer definitions and stricter penalties. It also enhances the training received by police officers regarding hate-crimes.

The bill, sponsored by Senator Sheila Kuehl (D) of West Los Angeles, was formally opposed by The Capitol Resource Institute and Campaign for California Families.

What has had Christians particularly alarmed is one part of the law that would criminalize the act of inciting violence if the probability of harm were sufficiently great. A press statement from the California Family Council showed a particular concern that such a law may be used to punish Christians for speaking out on moral issues. Calling SB-1234 “a dangerous bill in that it further expands special protections to certain groups of persons,” CFC questioned some of the terms used.

The bill, for example, mentioned not only victims, but also people “at risk of becoming a victim.”

How does someone determine that another person is “at risk of becoming a victim?” CFC asked.

CFC also found questionable the very definition of hate crimes stated in the bill: “... a criminal act committed, in whole or in part, because the victim is perceived to have one or more of the following actual or perceived characteristics: disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or association with a person or group with one or more of these actual or perceived characteristics.”

“The term ‘in whole or in part’ means that a crime can be labeled a hate crime even if it wasn’t the ‘main factor,’” CFC said.

An official objection to the bill was that “all intentionally perpetrated crimes involve an element of hate. The legislature should not hand-pick a few victims and elevate them above all others.”

One of the most vocal groups against SB-1234 from the time the bill passed the Assembly has been Concerned Women for America. “We have worked hard to keep SB-1234 from passing the legislature through newspaper advertising, talk radio alerts and a major grassroots campaign,” said Penny Harrington, legislative liaison for CWA of California. “We are now looking at all possible options to ensure that speech is not stifled here as it was elsewhere.”

One of the group’s main concerns is that judicial interpretation of this law could threaten freedom of speech and religion in the state. In their statements and press releases, they have pointed at several instances of legal actions against Christians on the grounds of hate crimes.

In the Swedish island of Oland, for example, Pentecostal Pastor Ake Green was charged, convicted and sentenced to a month in jail in July 2003 for his sermon titled: “Is Homosexuality Genetic or an Evil Force Playing Mind Games With People?” Although only a few people were present to hear the sermon, trouble started when he passed on his text to a local paper.

His words, describing homosexuality as an “abnormal, horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society,” and homosexuals as “perverts, whose sexual drive the Devil has used as his strongest weapon against God,” caught the attention of an historically progressive Scandinavian public (Sweden introduced registered partnership for gay couples in 1995, and legalized adoption of children by these couples in 2002) and of the authorities.

Technically, this new law should not apply to this type of situation, because the pastor did not incite violence.

The law specifically says: “Speech alone is not sufficient to support an action brought pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b), except upon a showing that the speech itself threatens violence against a specific person or group of persons; and the person or group of persons against whom the threat is directed reasonably fears that, because of the speech, violence will be committed against them or their property and that the person threatening violence had the apparent ability to carry out the threat.”

Phil Magnan, director of Biblical Family Advocates, is not convinced.

“There is no doubt in my mind that even though on the face of it, SB-1234 is meant to protect the public from hate crimes, it is in fact an end run around the 1st Amendment and an attempt to establish ‘thought and speech police’ to suppress religious speech. The loophole for this suppression is the subjective term in the bill ‘at risk for becoming a victim.’ All of us believe that direct threats should be prosecuted, but should hurt feelings and the non-affirmation and condemnation of homosexuality via the Bible be considered hate speech? I fear that both street advocates of righteousness and pastors in the pulpit will be prosecuted.” Magnan, who has been involved for years in activities and rallies to oppose homosexuality and abortion, remembered one particular episode when a police officer told him that if the people in an abortion clinic in which he was protesting felt threatened, he could be arrested.

“Please notice that I used the word ‘felt,’” he said. “We were not threatening them directly, but we were risking arrest because they ‘felt’ threatened. (Perceived threats are very subjective.) But I told the officer that there was no doubt that the unborn in that clinic ‘were’ threatened. There is a profound difference between an opinion and the reality of a situation. That encounter with the police was many years ago, I cannot imagine with the passage of SB-1234 things are going to get better.”

Perhaps the most shocking case of an arrest of Christians under hate crimes regulations occurred Oct. 10 in Philadelphia, where 11 people, six men and five women, including a teenager, were arrested, jailed and charged during an evangelistic outreach at the annual “Outfest” homosexual pride event in the public streets.

The 11 Christians were at first blocked by a group called “Pink Angels,” with the intent of keeping them out of the festival. Since the event was free of charge, however, the authorities conceded that they had a right to enter, and escorted them through.

The “Pink Angels” proceeded then to cover their signs with pink styrofoam and to blow loud whistles while Michael Marcavage, director of Repent America and organizer of the outreach, was trying to preach to the crowds.

At that point, Chief James Tiano, head of the Civil Affairs Unit, ordered the arrests of the Christians and hauled them to jail, where they spent 21 hours, being released the following day, except for a 67 -year-old woman who was detained an additional five days.

Ten people of the group were charged with three felonies and five misdemeanors. CWA, however, quotes police spokeswoman Maria Ibrahim as saying that some of the charges have been dropped. The remaining are criminal conspiracy, failure to disperse, disorderly conduct, and obstructing a highway. The teenager was charged only with one misdemeanor.

A preliminary hearing has been set for Dec. 14 in Philadelphia City Court.

Marcavage called the arrest “one of the most remarkable and unlawful actions by police that I have ever witnessed.”

“Christians are now being labeled as ‘haters’ and any speech that homosexuals perceive to be intimidating, such as our Christian witness at Outfest, makes them a prime target for ‘hate crimes legislation,’” he continued.

Mike Brown, pastor of Christ United Reformed Church in Santee, believes that the hostility to Christians in similar events could have been fomented by some inappropriate behavior of a few.

“The reason why liberal groups often target Christians as ‘homophobic’ and ‘haters of homosexuality’ is that some evangelicals behave in an unbiblical fashion. When evangelicals are rallying with their signs that read things such as ‘God hates fags,’ I am not surprised at all when laws are trying to be passed against hate speech.”

“A rally against homosexuality should warrant a rally against other sins, such as taking the name of God in vain or covetousness, which are far, far more rampant in our society than homosexuality. But of course, standing outside Fashion Valley with a sign and a bullhorn announcing that the covetous and idolators will burn in hell is not the method God gave to his church of announcing his good news and seeing sinners reconciled to God through Jesus Christ.”

Brown wonders if some methods may be putting the cart before the horse. “The church’s responsibility is to preach the Gospel and bring people to Christ,” he said. “Only then can a heart be changed and new behavior be manifested.”

“As Paul makes clear in Romans,” he continued, “bringing people the law, or telling them that God indeed does hate sin, which includes the sin of homosexuality, will not change anyone. The law must always be followed with the Gospel, which is the remedy. The same sins that are in our culture today were in Paul’s culture in the first century Greco-Roman world. Paul did not get on a political campaign. He did not command Christians to fight sins by political power; rather, he did what he was commanded to do in the Great Commission, namely, build the kingdom of God by the means God ordained: the preaching of the Gospel.”

Obviously, however, there are biblical passages that cannot — and should not — be avoided. What if you are preaching on one of those? What if someone feels offended and reports you to the authorities?

“I would say that is a risk that is part of the Christian life,” Brown answered. “We believe the Bible to be the true, inspired and inerrant word of God. Therefore, a text — such as Rom. 1.26-27 or 1 Cor. 6.9-10 — that explicitly names homosexuality as sinful, must be treated and preached with the same ‘unashamedness’ as every other text. If this means persecution (or prosecution), so be it.”

According to John Little, an attorney in San Diego, we will have to wait and see what this law, to be enacted in January, will mean in practical terms. “There might be some wrong interpretations of the law, and then they will be contested. California has always been traditionally a spearhead state, and many others are probably watching to see what will happen here.”