Sunday, July 22, 2007

Thought control

For those keeping score at home, the House just passed a bill to make "Hate Crimes" a federal offense. Of course they couldn't get it passed on its own so "in typical Washington fashion, as an amendment tacked on to the National Defense Authorization Act."

So what is the issue? Are we just a bunch of red-neck hateful people? Or are Hate Crimes really about controlling "hate" or more about controlling "thought"?
That still leaves us with "why?" Do crimes against homosexuals go unpunished? Are people free to attack gays with impunity?

Of course not. There are already laws against assaults on people and property. Moreover, according to the FBI, crimes against homosexuals in the United States have dropped dramatically. In 2005, out of 863,000 cases of aggravated assault, just 177 cases were crimes of bias against homosexuals—far less than 1 percent.
So we needed a law to federalize this less than 1%. But still, shouldn't assaults motivated by hate face stronger punishment? Only if you are part of the "special class". Other assaults based on hate are just run of the mill crimes.
This bill would give the federal government jurisdiction over local criminal offenses believed to be "motivated by prejudice." Not just any prejudice, mind you, but prejudice based on "race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim."

Watch those phrases sexual orientation and gender identity, because they tell you which groups are pushing hardest for this bill. The committee rejected amendments that would include other groups, like veterans, the homeless, and senior citizens.
And since when did the freedom of speech get removed from the First Amendment?
We've seen where laws like this can lead: Hate crimes have been defined to include verbal attacks—and even peaceful speech. The Thought Police have already prosecuted Christians under hate-crime laws in England, Sweden, and Canada. And in Pennsylvania, 11 Christians were prosecuted under the state's hate crime law for preaching on a street corner against homosexuality.

Seems our "representatives" in DC are getting so bad, we look forward to when they are on holiday. My wife asked if this bill had gotten ratified by the Senate yet, and when I answered no, it was the weekend and they weren't working, she replied, "good". So there is still time to contact your senators and let them know we are watching.

4 comments:

Marti said...

This bill addresses the free speech issues head on. Stop lying. Stop being dishonest. Stop the rhetoric. You don't want us to be seen as normal, and be accepted by society. But please, don't destroy any credibility you have by being dishonest. This bill has NOTHING to to do with limiting free speech.

The most honest assessment I've ever seen is here:
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/news/2007/06/07/hate_crimes_law/

"But the larger message of the House vote is that a majority of representatives may now be ready to enact other laws protecting people from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. More than threats to free speech, it is the mainstream acceptance of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people that many Christian conservative groups most fear.

That’s why victory bells on one side are answered by alarm bells on the other."

Seriously, you lose any credibility in the secular world when you lie. Stop.

Marti said...

ooops

Marti said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
KaleJ said...

If this bill was so wonderful and supported, why did they have to tack it onto a Defense bill?

And I expressed nothing to warrant your outrageous claim, "You don't want us to be seen as normal, and be accepted by society". Like I pointed out, there are already laws on the books to protect against violent assault. So this law isn't just addressing that issue. Step by step we are being pushed into a federalized court system that draws its rulings from foreign precedent.

So don't kid yourself there. Haynes ignores these facts to whitewash the attack on the first amendment.