Connect with us

GOP Senate Hopeful: Bullying Bill Unconstitutional Because Kids Don’t Know They’re Gay

Published

on

Heather Wilson, a New Mexico Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate told supporters that a proposed anti-bullying bill is unconstitutional because children who haven’t reached puberty don’t know if they’re gay, and added the bill could violate the free-speech rights of bullies, and criminalize the act of teasing — which, she suggested, all kids do. Wilson was speaking about U.S. Senator Al Franken’s anti-bullying bill, the Student Non-Discrimination Act, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity protections to federal civil rights laws for students in public schools. Wilson, a former U.S. Congresswoman, appeared physically uncomfortable even discussing aspects of anti-gay bullying or homosexuality in general, as evidenced in the video, below.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Wb2AklsIVMk%3Fversion%3D3%26hl%3Den_US

“It is an act that would criminalize harassment or bullying in schools of children who are gay or who — it criminalizes bullying. It basically makes federal funding dependent on school board policies that will not tolerate bullying of people based on their sexual orientation or, you know, even when kids are below puberty,” Wilson wrongly told the audience. Amazingly, also, Wilson is under the false impression that children who have not reached puberty are not able to determine if they are LGBT.

“I mean if somebody gets bullied for having, gosh a low voice — that’s never happened to me,” Wilson continued. “But I think one of the things why I don’t support the act is because I think it’s misplaced. They are things I’m willing to tolerate that I’m not willing to approve.”

Clearly, Wilson is stating she is willing to “tolerate” homosexuality, but is not willing to “approve” of it — nor is she willing to approve of legislation that would help protect LGBT students, who are exponentially more likely to attempt suicide, to be kicked out of their homes, and to experience bullying than their heterosexual peers — thanks in no small part to the environment anti-LGBT lawmakers and religious leaders create. In other words, Heather Wilson seems to think that LGBT students actually deserve the bullying they get.

“With respect to this particular agenda we have to recognize as parents that children tease each other because you’re short or you’re tall or you’re a redhead or because you’re ugly or because you’re smart or because you’re dumb or all kinds of differences and as parents we have to deal with that and strengthen our children to be comfortable with themselves and also to show empathy and acceptance towards others, but that particular act is so broad it would actually punish children and say that it’s prohibited to express an opinion with respect to homosexuality in the schools. I just think that’s wrong and it’s a violation of the First Amendment.”

Heather Wilson, a Rhodes Scholar, is surprisingly uninformed on a matter this simple.

Amanda Terkel at The Huffington Post this afternoon offered an excellent analysis of Wilson’s speech:

Wilson’s characterization of SB 555 is inaccurate in several ways. First of all, it would not “criminalize” teasing.

“If you create a crime [in a law], you need to put words in the law like ‘sentencing’ or ‘imprisoned,'” explained a Senate staffer who declined to be named to speak openly. “[The law] is just not creating any crimes. That’s just incorrect.”

It’s also not banning teasing between students. It prohibits discrimination by public schools, and it makes sure a school responds to cases of pervasive harassment that interfere with a child’s education.

SB 555 is modeled on existing civil rights laws — such as Title VI and Title IX — that already prohibit discrimination based on certain classifications. This legislation would simply extend those protections to discrimination that occurs based on sexual orientation and gender identity, so it seems unlikely that Franken’s bill would count as unconstitutional and violate the First Amendment. In fact, to safeguard against such a charge, Section 9(b) of SB 555 says, “Nothing in this Act shall be construed to alter legal standards regarding, or affect the rights available to individuals or groups under…the First Amendment.”

Unsurprisingly, Wilson’s behavior when she was a U.S. Congresswoman also showed her lack of understand and concern for LGBT citizens.

“On February 27, 2005, Maestas and companion Joshua Stockham were beaten by six young men who screamed anti-gay epithets at them. The attackers followed Maestas and friends from the restaurant where the encounter began. The six young men who attacked Maestas and Stockham were the first prosecuted under New Mexico’s new hate crimes law,” the LGBT Hate Crimes Project reported.

Unconscious, Maestas was taken to St. Vincent Regional Medical Center in Santa Fe. Maestas suffered a broken nose and a concussion. He was kicked so hard that the food in his stomach came up into his throat, and stomach acid burned his lungs. He had also aspirated his own blood, and required the help of a respirator to breath.

On March 5, 300 people gathered at a vigil in support of Maestas. The vigil was attended by Police Chief Beverly Lennen and Governor Bill Richardson. During his remarks Richardson said, “What happened to James Maestas should never happen anywhere, on any planet. We as a society have got to find ways to end hatred.”

Wilson was one  of the few elected officials who not only did not attend the vigil, but did not make any public comments, nor does she support hate crimes legislation.

Unsurprisingly, in 2006, both the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) gave Wilson a 0% rating.

Perhaps Heather Wilson should sit down with the mother of Kenneth Weishuhn, Jr., the 14-year old who died by suicide this weekend because he was bullied by classmates and received death threats on his cell phone and social media sites.

 

Hat tip: American Bridge

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘To Do God Knows What’: Local Elections Official Reads Lara Trump the Riot Act

Published

15 mins ago

on

April 25, 2024

By

The county clerk for Ingham County, Michigan blasted Republican National Committee co-chair Lara Trump after the ex-president’s daughter-in-law bragged the RNC will have people to “physically handle” voters’ ballots in polling locations across the country this November.

“We now have the ability at the RNC not just to have poll watchers, people standing in polling locations, but people who can physically handle the ballots,” Trump told Newsmax host Eric Bolling this week, as NCRM reported.

“Will these people, will they be allowed to physically handle the ballots as well, Lara?” Bolling asked.

“Yup,” Trump replied.

Marc Elias, the top Democratic elections attorney who won 63 of the 64 lawsuits filed by the Donald Trump campaign in the 2020 election cycle (the one he did not win was later overturned), corrected Lara Trump.

READ MORE: ‘I Hope You Find Happiness’: Moskowitz Trolls Comer Over Impeachment Fail

“Poll observers are NEVER permitted to touch ballots. She is suggesting the RNC will infiltrate election offices,” Elias warned on Wednesday.

Barb Byrum, a former Michigan Democratic state representative with a law degree and a local hardware store, is the Ingham County Clerk, and thus the chief elections official for her county. She slammed Lara Trump and warned her the RNC had better not try to touch any ballots in her jurisdiction.

“I watched your video, and it’s riveting stuff. But if you think you’ll be touching ballots in my state, you’ve got another thing coming,” Byrum told Trump in response to the Newsmax interview.

“First and foremost, precinct workers, clerks, and voters are the only people authorized to touch ballots. For example, I am the County Clerk, and I interact with exactly one voted ballot: My own,” Byrum wrote, launching a lengthy series of social media posts educating Trump.

“Election inspectors are hired by local clerks in Michigan and we hire Democrats and Republicans to work in our polling places. We’re required by law to do so,” she continued. “In large cities and townships, the local clerks train those workers. In smaller cities and townships, that responsibility falls to County Clerks, like me.”

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

She explained, “precinct workers swear an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Michigan.”

“Among the provisions in the Michigan Constitution is the right to a secret ballot for our voters,” she added.

Byrum also educated Trump on her inaccurate representation of the consent decree, which was lifted by a court, not a judge’s death, as Lara Trump had claimed.

“It’s important for folks to understand what you’re talking about: The end of a consent decree that was keeping the RNC from intimidating and suppressing voters (especially in minority-majority areas).”

“With that now gone, you’re hoping for the RNC to step up their game and get people that you train to do god-knows what into the polling places.”

Byrum also warned Trump: “If election inspectors are found to be disrupting the process of an orderly election OR going outside their duties, local clerks are within their rights to dismiss them immediately.”

“So if you intend to train these 100,000 workers to do anything but their sacred constitutional obligation, they’ll find themselves on the curb faster than you can say ‘election interference.'”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

 

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘I Hope You Find Happiness’: Moskowitz Trolls Comer Over Impeachment Fail

Published

17 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) is mocking House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer over a CNN report revealing the embattled Kentucky Republican who has been alleging without proof President Joe Biden is the head of a vast multi-million dollar criminal bribery and influence-peddling conspiracy, has given up trying to impeach the leader of the free world.

CNN on Wednesday had reported, “after 15 months of coming up short in proving some of his biggest claims against the president, Comer recently approached one of his Republican colleagues and made a blunt admission: He was ready to be ‘done with’ the impeachment inquiry into Biden.” The news network described Chairman Comer as “frustrated” and his investigation as “at a dead end.”

One GOP lawmaker told CNN, “Comer is hoping Jesus comes so he can get out.”

“He is fed up,” the Republican added.

Despite the Chairman’s alleged remarks, “a House Oversight Committee spokesperson maintains that ‘the impeachment inquiry is ongoing and impeachment is 100% still on the table.'”

RELATED: ‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

Last week, Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) got into a shouting match with Chairman Comer, with the Maryland Democrat saying, “You have not identified a single crime – what is the crime that you want to impeach Joe Biden for and keep this nonsense going?” and Comer replying, “You’re about to find out.”

Before those heated remarks, Congressman Raskin chided Comer, humorously threatening to invite Rep. Moskowitz to return to the hearing.

Congressman Moskowitz appears to be the only member of the House Oversight Committee who has ever made a motion to call for a vote on impeaching President Biden, which he did last month, although he did it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

It appears the Moskowitz-Comer “bromance” may be over.

Wednesday afternoon Congressman Moskowitz, whose sarcasm is becoming well-known, used it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

“I was hoping our breakup would never become public,” he declared. “We had such a great thing while it lasted James. I will miss the time we spent together. I will miss our conversations. I will miss the pet names you gave me. I only wish you the best and hope you find happiness.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Published

19 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case centered on the question, can the federal government require states with strict abortion bans to allow physicians to perform abortions in emergency situations, specifically when the woman’s health, but not her life, is in danger?

The 1986 federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), signed into law by Republican President Ronald Reagan, says it can. The State of Idaho on Wednesday argued it cannot.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, The Washington Post’s Kim Bellware reported, “made a clear delineation between Idaho law and what EMTALA provides.”

“In Idaho, doctors have to shut their eyes to everything except death,” Prelogar said, according to Bellware. “Whereas under EMTALA, you’re supposed to be thinking about things like, ‘Is she about to lose her fertility? Is her uterus going to become incredibly scarred because of the bleeding? Is she about to undergo the possibility of kidney failure?’ ”

READ MORE: Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Attorney Imani Gandy, an award-winning journalist and Editor-at-Large for Rewire News Group, highlighted an issue central to the case.

“The issue of medical judgment vs. good faith judgment is a huge one because different states have different standards of judgment,” she writes. “If a doctor exercises their judgment, another doctor expert witness at trial could question that. That’s a BIG problem here. That’s why doctors are afraid to provide abortions. They may have an overzealous prosecutor come behind them and disagree.”

Right-wing Justice Samuel Alito appeared to draw the most fire from legal experts, as his questioning suggested “fetal personhood” should be the law, which it is not.

“Justice Alito is trying to import fetal personhood into federal statutory law by suggesting federal law might well prohibit hospitals from providing abortions as emergency stabilizing care,” observed Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis.

Paraphrasing Justice Alito, Kreis writes: “Alito: How can the federal government restrict what Idaho criminalizes simply because hospitals in Idaho have accepted federal funds?”

Appearing to answer that question, Georgia State University College of Law professor of law and Constitutional scholar Eric Segall wrote: “Our Constitution unequivocally allows the federal gov’t to offer the states money with conditions attached no matter how invasive b/c states can always say no. The conservative justices’ hostility to the spending power is based only on politics and values not text or history.”

Professor Segall also served up some of the strongest criticism of the right-wing justice.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

He wrote that Justice Alito “is basically making it clear he doesn’t care if pregnant women live or die as long as the fetus lives.”

Earlier Wednesday morning Segall had issued a warning: “Trigger alert: In about 20 minutes several of the conservative justices are going to show very clearly that that they care much more about fetuses than women suffering major pregnancy complications which is their way of owning the libs which is grotesque.”

Later, predicting “Alito is going to dissent,” Segall wrote: “Alito is dripping arrogance and condescension…in a case involving life, death, and medical emergencies. He has no bottom.”

Taking a broader view of the case, NYU professor of law Melissa Murray issued a strong warning: “The EMTALA case, Moyle v. US, hasn’t received as much attention as the mifepristone case, but it is huge. Not only implicates access to emergency medical procedures (like abortion in cases of miscarriage), but the broader question of federal law supremacy.”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.