« No Apology Necessary, General Pace | Main | Imus & Tigers & Rosie, OH MY! »

Tuesday, March 20, 2007



There's a lot of deceit going on out there and it's not coming from me. I've had to be more explicit, public and come under far more scrutiny than perhaps anyone else who reads this.

This part of my life took place over a decade ago--period.

I look forward to the day when I'll be chasing a toddler across the living room and married to a woman who is proud to have me as the father of her children.

I frankly don't care, who has a problem wtih this. The Marine Corps is a conversion experience and my life changed when I joined.

Semper Fi,

Matt Sanchez

[email protected]



I could be wrong about this, but I was pretty sure that the FBI counts the statistics of anti-white, anti-heterosexual, and anti-Protestant hate crimes, too. I don't mean to say hate crime laws are a good thing (they are dangerously close to thought crime laws), but you can't say they help one group over another. Any group is protected if the crime can be proven to have been provoked by the fact that the victim was a member of the perceived group.

Of course, I don't care if someone kills a man because he's black/gay/Jewish or because he wanted to steal his TV/car/wallet. Either way, my first instinct would be to make sure he's behind bars for the rest of his natural life.


I'm pretty sure that religion is already covered under hate-crime legislation. I could be wrong, but let's just assume that it is. Should we do away with that because it offers some sort of "special right" to people of faith? I don't understand the need to really fight having a person's sexual orientation included in the list.

I don't recall ever hearing the religious crowd (as a PK, I'm pretty sure I would have) get up in arms regarding hate crimes and who is included until a person's sexual orientation was brought to the forefront. I personally believe that all people (black/white, brown, asian, gay, straight, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Athiest, etc.) should be treated equally. But it just seems to me that, especially for a Christian, to allow themselves to be covered under hate-crimes, but then work actively to get people they disagree to NOT be covered, just seems to smack of eliteism (amongst other things).


L. Alexander.

your heartless

Alan Chambers

Well that not only makes no sense, it isn't true.



I'm assuming your comment was directed at me. I apologize if you feel it didn't make any sense. After re-reading my comment and the Hate Crimes Act, I do believe what I wrote to be truthful. You are advocating a policy that would keep sexual orientation from being covered under the Hate Crimes Act. An Act which currently covers Religion. Which means that as a person of faith, if a crime was committed against you and that crime met certain of the criteria, it could and probably would be, prosecuted as a hate crime. I could understand your position better if you were working to do away with the Hate Crimes Act all together thereby putting every crime on a level playing field. But, as a person of faith, to be covered under the Act, but work to preclude others from also being covered, just seems...I don't the right word, it just doesn't seem right I guess.


Alan Chambers


My comment was directed towards the person who called me heartless.

I am glad that you commented, though, because it allows me to clarify that I am opposed to *all* hate crimes legislation, not just to the inclusion of sexual orientation or gender identity.


Guess I was feelin' a little sensitive...LOL!

Thanks for clarifying your position. Working to do away with Hate Crime penalties is an interesting concept, although I rather feel like the general tenor of the debate is heading in the other direction.

Have a great weekend!


John Chambers

Thought you might find these interesting:



Alan Chambers


Nice last name....as for the links, that is what you call tolerance. Funny, the activist gay community calls for tolerance (AKA: complete endorsement and acceptance of homosexuality or else) and then they treat us like we are garbage.

Willie Hewes

Alan, if you are against all hate crime legislation, why didn't you say so in the first place? Why does your post only contrast the value of the lives of gay people versus non-gay people? Why doesn't your original post acknowledge that by your own logic you are currently leading a more 'valuable life' (as a member of a faith community) than you were as a gay man?

That logic is faulty to start with. Hate crime legislation punishes people who commit hate crimes more harshly not because their victim was more valued, but because their crime affects not only the victim, but the community he or she represented to his attacker. Swastikas and anti-semitic text sprayed onto a synagogue do not just damage a building, they put fear and terror into a community.

You oppose all hate crime legislation? Then do so. Don't make it about the gays.


Thanks a lot Alan!

Since Mr. Chambers advocates for violence against gays (including violence against high school students who are either gay or perceived to be gay), I want to personally thank him for this:



What a stupendously ridiculous comment.

Alan, I would suggest a ban on Mr (?) Borg. What a horrible accusation.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Get New Posts Via Email

  • Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

Blog powered by Typepad