Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

California Bill Proposes Removing Cops Who Express Religious Or Conservative Beliefs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • California Bill Proposes Removing Cops Who Express Religious Or Conservative Beliefs

    https://thefederalist.com/2021/03/16/california-bill-proposes-removing-cops-who-express-religious-or-conservative-beliefs/

    California Bill Proposes Removing Cops Who Express Religious Or Conservative Beliefs


    MARCH 16, 2021 By Gabe Kaminsky
    A new bill introduced by California State Assembly Member Ash Kalra in San Jose would prohibit police officers from serving if they have used arbitrarily defined “hate speech” or are affiliated with a “hate group.”

    The bill, known as the California Law Enforcement Accountability Reform Act (CLEAR Act), claims to combat “the infiltration of extremists in our law enforcement agencies” and would mandate a background check for all officers who have “exchanged racist and homophobic messages.”

    Kalra claims that AB 655 is necessary to prevent “the apparent cooperation, participation, and support of some law enforcement” in the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.

    The bill defines hate speech as “as advocating or supporting the denial of constitutional rights of, the genocide of, or violence towards, any group of persons based upon race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.”

    Pacific Justice Institute Senior Staff Attorney Matthew McReynolds said this broad and purposefully arbitrary definition could give way for Christians and conservatives to be classified as “hateful” based on the premise of rejecting abortion or supporting Proposition 8 in California, a same-sex amendment that passed in 2008.

    McReynolds also questioned how this would affect those of the Muslim faith — since many religious mosques and followers have taken a stance against homosexuality.

    “Under the guise of addressing police gangs, the bill at the same time launches an inexplicable, unwarranted, and unprecedented attack on peaceable, conscientious officers who happen to hold conservative political and religious views,” wrote Reynolds. “Indeed, this is one of the most undisguised and appalling attempts we have ever seen, in more than 20 years of monitoring such legislation, on the freedom of association and freedom to choose minority viewpoints.”
    That's what
    - She

    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
    Stephen R. Donaldson

  • #2
    The basic idea is fine; frankly, someone with ties to the KKK, or who posts on Facebook about how awesome Hitler was and how much he hates Jews, or how they wish we could just go back to stoning gay people in public has no place in law enforcement imo.

    But without question, this will be used where and when it shouldn't be. The left can be very loose with what they define as racism, bigotry, violence, etc.

    "Homosexuality is a sin" - homophobic bigot, get out of here.

    "I think 'critical race theory' is junk" - disgusting racist, see you later.

    "Trump did some good things as President" - fascist neo-Nazi, goodbye.

    Comment


    • #3
      On the other hand, the Fort Hood shooter (killed 13 and wounded 30 soldiers) was known to be a problematic Muslim, but they dare not do or say anything because Allah!!!!

      (And it took quite a bit of prodding before Obama could even admit this was Islamic Terrorism -- the phrase had been "workplace violence")
      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
        https://thefederalist.com/2021/03/16/california-bill-proposes-removing-cops-who-express-religious-or-conservative-beliefs/

        California Bill Proposes Removing Cops Who Express Religious Or Conservative Beliefs


        MARCH 16, 2021 By Gabe Kaminsky
        A new bill introduced by California State Assembly Member Ash Kalra in San Jose would prohibit police officers from serving if they have used arbitrarily defined “hate speech” or are affiliated with a “hate group.”

        The bill, known as the California Law Enforcement Accountability Reform Act (CLEAR Act), claims to combat “the infiltration of extremists in our law enforcement agencies” and would mandate a background check for all officers who have “exchanged racist and homophobic messages.”

        Kalra claims that AB 655 is necessary to prevent “the apparent cooperation, participation, and support of some law enforcement” in the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.

        The bill defines hate speech as “as advocating or supporting the denial of constitutional rights of, the genocide of, or violence towards, any group of persons based upon race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.”

        Pacific Justice Institute Senior Staff Attorney Matthew McReynolds said this broad and purposefully arbitrary definition could give way for Christians and conservatives to be classified as “hateful” based on the premise of rejecting abortion or supporting Proposition 8 in California, a same-sex amendment that passed in 2008.

        McReynolds also questioned how this would affect those of the Muslim faith — since many religious mosques and followers have taken a stance against homosexuality.

        “Under the guise of addressing police gangs, the bill at the same time launches an inexplicable, unwarranted, and unprecedented attack on peaceable, conscientious officers who happen to hold conservative political and religious views,” wrote Reynolds. “Indeed, this is one of the most undisguised and appalling attempts we have ever seen, in more than 20 years of monitoring such legislation, on the freedom of association and freedom to choose minority viewpoints.”
        I would like to see them try to enact this. It might finally serve as the needed wake up call that this country so sorely needs.

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          I would like to see them try to enact this. It might finally serve as the needed wake up call that this country so sorely needs.
          Put this in the context of prop 16 they proposed but was voted down. Now it makes sense. Cali is going bonkers.
          "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            https://thefederalist.com/2021/03/16/california-bill-proposes-removing-cops-who-express-religious-or-conservative-beliefs/

            California Bill Proposes Removing Cops Who Express Religious Or Conservative Beliefs


            MARCH 16, 2021 By Gabe Kaminsky
            A new bill introduced by California State Assembly Member Ash Kalra in San Jose would prohibit police officers from serving if they have used arbitrarily defined “hate speech” or are affiliated with a “hate group.”

            The bill, known as the California Law Enforcement Accountability Reform Act (CLEAR Act), claims to combat “the infiltration of extremists in our law enforcement agencies” and would mandate a background check for all officers who have “exchanged racist and homophobic messages.”

            Kalra claims that AB 655 is necessary to prevent “the apparent cooperation, participation, and support of some law enforcement” in the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.

            The bill defines hate speech as “as advocating or supporting the denial of constitutional rights of, the genocide of, or violence towards, any group of persons based upon race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.”

            Pacific Justice Institute Senior Staff Attorney Matthew McReynolds said this broad and purposefully arbitrary definition could give way for Christians and conservatives to be classified as “hateful” based on the premise of rejecting abortion or supporting Proposition 8 in California, a same-sex amendment that passed in 2008.

            McReynolds also questioned how this would affect those of the Muslim faith — since many religious mosques and followers have taken a stance against homosexuality.

            “Under the guise of addressing police gangs, the bill at the same time launches an inexplicable, unwarranted, and unprecedented attack on peaceable, conscientious officers who happen to hold conservative political and religious views,” wrote Reynolds. “Indeed, this is one of the most undisguised and appalling attempts we have ever seen, in more than 20 years of monitoring such legislation, on the freedom of association and freedom to choose minority viewpoints.”
            Well, say goodbye to the majority of cops. What a blatant attempt to discriminate against people for their religious beliefs.
            "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              On the other hand, the Fort Hood shooter (killed 13 and wounded 30 soldiers) was known to be a problematic Muslim, but they dare not do or say anything because Allah!!!!

              (And it took quite a bit of prodding before Obama could even admit this was Islamic Terrorism -- the phrase had been "workplace violence")
              The problem with this liberal hypocrisy wherein they're afraid to say anything negative about Muslims but freely bash Christians, is that the trajectory is dangerous. Continue to discriminate against a religious group, and let them observe the protected status of another religious group because of the threat of violence when they're offended....and how long does it take before someone decides a few violent acts will protect the rest of their religious community from further discrimination? That may not sound very "Christian" to many of us, but a very large portion of America's Christians as NOT pacifists, which means that there IS a threshold of discriminatory conduct that, if reached, is likely to trigger a violent response.
              "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by myth View Post

                The problem with this liberal hypocrisy wherein they're afraid to say anything negative about Muslims but freely bash Christians, is that the trajectory is dangerous. Continue to discriminate against a religious group, and let them observe the protected status of another religious group because of the threat of violence when they're offended....and how long does it take before someone decides a few violent acts will protect the rest of their religious community from further discrimination? That may not sound very "Christian" to many of us, but a very large portion of America's Christians as NOT pacifists, which means that there IS a threshold of discriminatory conduct that, if reached, is likely to trigger a violent response.
                What makes you think that liberals are afraid to say anything negative about Muslims?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
                  What makes you think that liberals are afraid to say anything negative about Muslims?
                  Oh, boy ---- in the very example given, they wanted to hide the name of the shooter because it "sounded Islamic" (Nidal Hasan), then wanted to hide the fact that it was a terrorist attack, because he was a U.S. Army major and psychiatrist, which means the Army had promoted him repeatedly, in SPITE of the fact that there were numerous indications in his history with the Army that should have been red flags...

                  Nidal Hasan’s Murders Termed ‘Workplace Violence’ by U.S.

                  You think, maybe, that was CONSERVATIVES trying to hide his MUSLIM association?

                  "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                    Oh, boy ---- in the very example given, they wanted to hide the name of the shooter because it "sounded Islamic" (Nidal Hasan), then wanted to hide the fact that it was a terrorist attack, because he was a U.S. Army major and psychiatrist, which means the Army had promoted him repeatedly, in SPITE of the fact that there were numerous indications in his history with the Army that should have been red flags...

                    Nidal Hasan’s Murders Termed ‘Workplace Violence’ by U.S.

                    You think, maybe, that was CONSERVATIVES trying to hide his MUSLIM association?
                    Even assuming your claims without evidence are true, how does that translate into a general statement about liberals?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
                      Even assuming your claims without evidence are true,
                      You know how to Google, right?

                      how does that translate into a general statement about liberals?
                      I shall leave you to your ignorance.

                      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                        You know how to Google, right?
                        It's not my responsibility to find evidence for your claim.

                        I shall leave you to your ignorance.
                        Making blanket statements about more than half the population with nothing to back it up seems pretty ignorant to me.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post

                          What makes you think that liberals are afraid to say anything negative about Muslims?
                          Do you live under a rock or something?
                          Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by QuantaFille View Post

                            Do you live under a rock or something?
                            I don't solely consume media within a conservative echo chamber.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
                              It's not my responsibility to find evidence for your claim.
                              Nor is it my responsibility to spoon feed you what you can easily find on your own, if you're actually interested.

                              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Gondwanaland, Today, 07:29 PM
                              0 responses
                              12 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Gondwanaland  
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Today, 08:17 AM
                              30 responses
                              150 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Reepicheep  
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, Today, 05:18 AM
                              17 responses
                              129 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Gondwanaland  
                              Started by Christian3, Yesterday, 01:13 PM
                              12 responses
                              65 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 12:40 PM
                              20 responses
                              157 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Mountain Man  
                              Working...
                              X