Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

US Senate passes Matthew Shepard hate crimes bill

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. This is great news! Nancy Pellosi, bless you!!!

  2. Jean-Paul Bentham 23 Oct 2009, 1:32pm

    ‘Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said:

    “We look forward to President Obama signing it into law: our nation’s first major piece of civil rights legislation for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.”‘

    Great news indeed. Congratulations also to Matthew’s mother. It’s been a long, hard road, one that only a loving and caring mother would undertake.

    RIP Matthew Shepard.

  3. Rev JD Spears 23 Oct 2009, 2:20pm

    It is sad that such a law needed to be made. For to long glbti have been targeted just because they are glbti persons. Law seemingly condoned such attacks, and frankly local law enforce often truned a blind eye to it. Although this law, or rather ammending the existing Hate Crime law to include glbti persons, will not eliminate such attacks, it will cause fewer to occur.

  4. Aussie Gay Activist Paul Mitchell 23 Oct 2009, 4:23pm

    YES – YES – YES I have waited for years for this humble moment!!!!!

    Obama in 30 days time must SIGN it into law. If he vetoes he will pay the ultimate price of gays violently storming into the Whitehouse and demanding he un-veto it!!!!!!!!

  5. I’m extremely glad that this bill will be enacted, but, I’m saddened that it had to be “attached” to a totally unrelated defense bill for it to pass; rather than by its own merits as a stand alone bill.

    As I understand this tactic in American politics, it is a “back door” tactic.

    If you cannot get your bill passed by the opposition, then you “attach” it to a bill they support and if they want their bill to pass, they have to vote for your “attachment” too.

    It speaks wonders for the American political system, that such a basic human right has to be “sneaked” into law in such a manner.

    This section of the bill should have passed on acclimation with no vote required.

  6. Damn! Edit to my previous post, of course I meant…

    This section of the bill should have passed on acclamation with no vote required.

  7. Eagle the militant American Indian-Jew 24 Oct 2009, 2:59am

    New Mexico passed a hate crime bill two years ago and another bill called the Fred Phelps hate bill just last year that makes it a crime for any group to picket or demonstrate at funerals or against any gays to incite violence or hatred under the penalty if convicted up to five years in prison and a ten thousand dollar fine or both. Then they even barred Fred Phelps from coming into the state with his demon army as they have labeled him a domestic terrorist. In fact even talking in hateful terms against gays in public where others can hear you is a crime (as it should be because such talk leads to violence.)I still say getting Obama elected was the greatest thing toward gay rights in the USA.

  8. David Myers 24 Oct 2009, 7:44am

    Paul Mitchell, why do you even raise the possibility of Obama vetoing the bill. Obama promised to sign this when he ran for president and as president,not one week ago, he pointed with pride to the bill’s progress towards his desk and pledged to sign it as a down payment on fulfilling all of his promises to the LGBT community. There’s no way he would veto it. Obama is a very intelligent thoughtful and organized president who preceeds in an orderly, thoughtful, and measured fashion in order to accomplish all of his goals. In addition he has been handed a country that has suffured as a result of the disasterous reign of George (the second) and Dick, who have left the country economically and morally bankrupt. The problems that can’t wait are numerous, world-wide, and simultaneous which requires a tremendous degree of planning and budgeting of his and the Democratic Party’s political capital and staff/human resources. I believe Obama personally supports our goals in attaining equality rights on all levels. Let’s continue to give him support and time to get everything done – the right way. If Obama used an executive order to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” right now, it might prevent the legislation that created that law from being repealed because congresspersons will feel they don’t have to put their vote and their necks on the line to repeal that legislation, because Obama had already ended the enforcement of that policy by executive order, never mind that that would mean a future president could restore “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” by executive order because the law would still be on the books – just not being enforced under the current administration. Doesn’t it make sense to do it right, to pull the congress and the citizenry along in the process of doing the right thing?

  9. Another Chris 24 Oct 2009, 6:11pm

    David – there was some concern about a veto because Obama said flat out that he’d veto any bill that funded the F-22. However, the F-22 funding was stripped out of the version of the bill that passed, so it’s not an issue now. He still isn’t happy with the funding for a new engine for the F-35, but I don’t think he’ll veto the bill over it.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all