Blacks Support Hate Crimes Bill
By Keith Boykin, in politics·race
Friday, May 4 2007, 9:41AM
A few months ago, I wrote a controversial column asking Why Are Whites So Homophobic? At that time, General Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had just declared that homosexuality was "immoral," and I noted then that no one used the occasion to sermonize on white homophobia. But whenever we see a prominent black person (or not so prominent black pastor) we immediately start asking why blacks are so homophobic. For the record, I think all Americans are homophobic, but I don't know that any one race is more homophobic than another.
Blacks often express their homophobia differently, but most polls show that blacks support basic civil rights for gays and lesbians. That's why I was encouraged by yesterday's vote in the House of Representatives where every single member of the Congressional Black Caucus who was present voted to support the Matthew Shepard Act that would outlaw hate crimes against gays and lesbians. The only other member of the CBC, Senator Barack Obama, also supports the bill and will surely vote for it when it comes to the Senate.
Two CBC members, Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-PA) and Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), did not vote. I spoke to Fattah's communications director this morning and he informed me that the congressman was campaigning in Philadelphia for the upcoming May 15 mayoral election, in which he is a candidate. The spokesman, Ron Goldwyn, told me that Rep. Fattah strongly supports the hate crimes bill. Fattah has come under fire recently for missing votes, but he told the media: "What the public needs to know is there is no vote of significance that I have missed on the floor of the House."
Meanwhile, I contacted Eddie Bernice Johnson's office today and her spokesperson said Rep. Johnson had an "excused absence" from the House and was in Dallas on official business on Thursday. But Johnson "would have voted for it," if she had been in Washington, her spokesperson said.
The bill passed 237 to 180, and I found this statistical information on Pam's House Blend. Of the Democrats in the House, 212 voted in favor of it while 14 did not. All 14 opponents were white men. Of the Republicans, only 25 voted for the bill and 166 did not. (And you wonder why people say the Republicans are anti-gay?) Six Democrats and 10 Republicans did not vote.
Below is Pam's list of the Democrats who voted against the bill. Notice they are all white men. That's not to cast aspersions on white men. Rep. Barney Frank, an openly gay supporter of the bill (shown in the YouTube video above) is also a white man. No one ever claims that all white men are rabidly homophobic just because some of them are clearly anti-gay, but people make such sweeping assumptions about African Americans all the time.
Alabama - Bud Cramer
Arkansas - Marion Berry, Mike Ross
Indiana - Joe Donnelly, Brad Ellsworth
Louisiana - Charlie Melancon
Minnesota - Collin Peterson
Mississippi - Gene Taylor
North Carolina - Mike McIntyre, Heath Shuler
Oklahoma - Dan Boren
Pennsylvania - Christopher Carney
Tennessee - Bart Gordon, Lincoln Davis.
The bill now goes to the Senate, but President Bush has threatened to veto the measure if it should reach his desk. The White House says there is no need for the bill because state and local laws already cover the crimes it addresses. That's so untrue that it can't be considered a mistake. It's a flat out lie.
Rep. Keith Ellison (shown in the YouTube video above) is a black Democrat and the first Muslim elected to Congress. During the House floor debate, he asked two poignant questions to the opponents of the bill. "Why do you want to protect thugs and hate mongers? Why don't you want to stand with the civilized community and say hate is wrong and we must stop it?"
Comments conceal
MidwestGuy
May 4 2007, 10:01AM
Keith, this is quite interesting. I've been watching the buildup to this vote and am anticipating the president's veto on this.
What's interesting is that this seems to add a different perspective to the "black people are homophobic" debate that we so often here publicly...and of course on your website as well. We should ask ourselves, what exactly does this mean that blacks (at least legislatively) are always "for" gay rights vs. whites? Is the black church more homophobic than white churches? Or as you said, are American's just homophobic in general. These are things we should continue to play close attention to rather than continuing "miseducation" of what blacks do/not want.
For the record, I think (rightfully so) that blacks are mostly against the idea of "gay marraige" than they are "gay rights." Looking at the Republican debate last night, it was obvious that they are not the party of inclusion. I was kinda shocked to see the candidate say that he would support employers not hiring gays.
Derrick from Philly
May 4 2007, 10:05AM
I have no doubt that many white gays who criticize anti-gay black public figures are racist anyway. They look for the opportunity to chastise homophobic blacks by reminding them of their complaints about racial hatred over the years while now practicing a similar hatred towards gays. Many (but not all) of those white gays are racist anyway, they'd hate blacks whether or not they're homophobic. Of course, they don't like us black gays either.
When we black gays criticize anti-gay black folks we GOTTA' RIGHT TO. We say to gay-hating blacks,"You have some goddamn nerve telling me I'm not fit to be alive when you should know what it feels like to be treated like shit yourself. What?...your family come out of a better cotton plantation than mine?"
Troy
May 4 2007, 10:15AM
crumbs aint enough and the names and lives of too many individuals involved deserve better...I think I've seen this bill on the dollar menu at McDonalds. A band aid won't do it, black or white.
The Captain
May 4 2007, 10:38AM
"Congressman Mike Pence (R) of Indiana offered a Freedom of Religion amendment to this hate crimes bill. It asked that nothing in this law limit the religious freedom of any person or group under the Constitution. The committee refused to adopt it. It also refused to adopt amendments protecting other groups from hate crimes—like members of the military, who are often targets of verbal attacks and spitting. They also shot down amendments that would protect the homeless and senior citizens, also often targeted by criminals. Nothing doing, the committee said—the only group they wanted to protect: homosexuals.
Clearly, the intent of this law is not to prevent crime, but to shut down freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of thought. Its passage would strike at the very heart of our democracy."
THIS BILL SHOULD BE SHOT! I DEMAND THE PRESIDENT VETO.
cmoney
May 4 2007, 10:57AM
Derrick from Philly: You always crack me up! LOL! I think it's great that the CBC is supporting this measure. Unfortunately, they are at odds with the big Black churches that often support them. On one hand, this can be seen as political courage by the CBC members. On the other, it just masks the hidden and often unspoken homophobia in the Black community. Just the other day you were discussing a letter from some church lady discussing how God allowed her to stop being a lesbian. Just like in Jamaica, the Black community's homophobia is rooted in a bastardized interpretation of religion. Check out any society that has low church attendance rates, e.g. Western Europe, and you will find less homophobia. The most homophobic societies have the highest level of church attendance and influence of religion in their society such as the U.S.A., Nigeria, Jamaica, Poland, most all Muslim nations. Coincidence? I think not.
Greg from Atlanta
May 4 2007, 12:18PM
Great article! Just wanted to add that, when the Georgia Senate was considering an anti-marriage constitutional amendment a few years ago, every black member voted no, while several white Democrats voted yes and provided the margin of victory. The CBC consistently has been the best friend to our community and deserves our heartfelt appreciation and support. The fact that the CBC has provided this support when many constituents have been ambivalent or maybe even hostile simply shows that they are willing to provide something sorely lacking in politics today: leadership.
bellah
May 4 2007, 4:11PM
Christians are homophobic. the Church is homophobic. Every church that has attempted to allow gays or women into the priesthood or marriage has seen the immediate sanctions of there governing body, immediate defections of membership etc. , When the church acts in a christian manner they are chastised. White or in communites of Color.
edvince
May 4 2007, 4:59PM
Great news! We as a race have had a tumultious history with hate in our struggle of basic civil rights. Gays and others suppressed groups have this common thread. The US gay community in the past 5 years has surged speedily ahead in obtaining basic civil rights. Who would have believed in 2002 marrige, civil unions would become law of the land in the New England States of USA? Way 2 Go,
shindo
May 4 2007, 8:35PM
As an someone who's Asian-American, I'll chime in. I think it's interesting when a white person says something or does something noteworthy, it's hardly a reflection on white people. Somehow, it's seen as the deeds of an individual, good or bad. Yet, when a non-white person does something noteworthy, especially the bad stuff, it becomes a reflection on them and their "tribe," so to speak. This is what Koreans were concerned about when Cho Seung Hui committed the Virginia Tech shootings. This was the heinous act of an individual (for God knows what reasons), not Koreans or Asian people. As for vocally homophobic African-Americans, we should understand they are INDIVIDUALS voicing their opionions, not people who speak for African-Americans as a whole. We should protest them and their opinions, not pin it on the whole race.
Albert
May 4 2007, 9:08PM
As a born again, bible toting, tongue talking, Pentecostal, I must say that anywhere their is injustice, oppression and hatred, it is the job of the legislature to protect the citizens who are on the receiving end of the hatred. Unfortunately, politcal debates in our country have been reduced to ignorant rants of people with ideological axes to burn.I long for thoughtful debates about facts and real people where we are given real choices. Instead, we are given the choice to vote for Bush or be marked as a bad Christian.
The real problem today is aan uneducated electorate who is totally disconnected from what goes on in politics. The reasons for this are numerous. My biggest frustration continues to be with the corporate media (republicans would call it a liberal media but if that be the case they would have done some real investigative journalism before the run up to this war) who is more interested in their bottom line than they are with spending the money it takes to bring the public quality journalis
BITTER
May 4 2007, 9:51PM
Divide and conquer, anyone?
Black folk in the USA have always been about live and let live - it's been our goal, but too many white people have refused to allow us to live that way. So naturally when gays say they want the same thing, the media is going to pick on black and accuse them of being more homophobic than the rest of the US....that's all.
LaRufus
May 5 2007, 7:45PM
On the fence about adding "gay" to the hate crimes bill, since as usual, the only ones who will benefit are white gay men. Sorry if that offends, but, I see no need for the addition, since its yet another example of them hopping on the civil rights bandwagon, when they already have mnore rights than black lgbt's who usually are at the short end of the stick based first on skin and then sexuality.
t-bag
May 6 2007, 1:47AM
Firstly I would like to say the hate crime statue (and any amendments) does not directly state which particular race, sexual orientation, religion, or age group it protects. That means that if a group of gay men attack a straight male SOLELY because he is straight then the straight male could claim that he was the victim of a hate crime. The same could be said for a group of black males who attack a white male SOLELY because he is white, this statue is not specific in who it protects because it protects virtually everyone.
Secondly, I find it weird that these religious groups are trying to strike down this amendment when they are protected under the hate crimes laws.
Thirdly, Hate crimes or meant to deter people from committing crimes, they don't punish you for having your beliefs because your beliefs are protected under the constitution; they are meant to stop people from robbing people of their civil liberties.
Truth
May 8 2007, 1:20PM
a dispute over an amendment offered by Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) revealed that H.R. 1592 will have severe limitations on First Amendment guarantees of freedom of religion in America.
The Pence amendment read: “Nothing in this section limits the religious freedom of any person or group under the constitution,” meaning Christians and any other religious group that professed its beliefs against homosexual behavior would not suffer persecution for their convictions.
A number of Republicans then spoke in support of the need for such an amendment.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) asked, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”
Chairman John Conyers and Congressional Democrats kept evading the issue, providing reasons why they could not accept the amendment until Rep. Lundgren
Wes
November 20 2007, 12:12AM
This is a lopsided bill,in that you want it to
punishj whites but not blacks...All this does is
create more problems for our country.When its a hate crime,
like the 5 blacks beating up the white kid .then
they should be charged as such
Comment Preview