Hate Crime law HR-1913 may offer federal protection to 30 different “sexual orientations.” Yet, as alarming as this is, the problem with hate-crime laws doesn’t lie in the details. It lies in the laws themselves.

In another example of creating specially-protected classes of people, the government is poised to offer homosexuals and other groups defined by sexual behavior protected status under federal hate-crime law. And the scope of the bill is great, encompassing a whole host of sexual perversions. Standard Newswire provides the following information:

. . . the House Judiciary Committee refused to exclude pedophiles from the bill's protection. The Committee also refused to include veterans. Moreover, the bill does not include the elderly.

H.R. 1913 (Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009) is not about stopping crime but is designed to give "actual or perceived" sexual preference or "gender identity" (which is still classified as a mental disorder) the same legal status as race. The DSM IVR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual used by psychologists and psychiatrists to diagnose mental disorders) lists more than 30 "sexual orientations" and "Gender Identity Disorders," including pedophilia. The hate crimes bill does not limit "sexual orientation" or "gender identity" and, thus, includes all these disorders and fetishes. The use of "actual or perceived" includes those with disorders or deviant sexual preferences and those who do not have such disorders or fetishes, so long as it is alleged that the person charged allegedly "thought" the other person had such [a] disorder or fetish.

As if this isn’t bad enough, many fear that the bill could also be used to stifle free speech. CBNnews.com addresses this, writing that Texas congressman and former judge Louie Gohmert suggested that a hate-crime law “would add nothing but punishment for pastors who preach biblically held beliefs against homosexuality."

‘It would not take too many arrests to have an extraordinary chilling affect [sic] on some religious teachings with regard to sexual immorality,’ Gohmert claimed.”

This isn’t paranoia, as the pink guillotine has already used similar laws overseas to persecute people uttering unfashionable beliefs. For instance, Ake Green, a Swedish pastor imprisoned for preaching against homosexuality in a sermon. And then there was Bill Whatcott, a Christian who was fined $20,000 by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission for criticizing homosexuality, just to mention a couple of cases.
 
Yet, whatever the details, it’s a mistake to become so immersed in them that we miss the big picture. Because the problem with hate-crime laws lies not in who is protected, who is punished and what the consequences are. It lies with the laws themselves.

Hate-crime laws punish thoughts and words. Consider this example: two crimes are committed, and they are identical in terms of the action undertaken. But they are prosecuted very differently. The perpetrator of the first crime is deemed to have been motivated by a politically-correct sin, greed, and receives five years in prison. The criminal hands in the second crime, however, are said to have been animated by “hate” – as defined by oh-so loving social engineers – thus, the perpetrator is sent away for 15 years.

Now, we can conclude that the act itself warranted five years prison, as that is what was handed down when only the act was considered. So, we have to ask, what were the extra 10 years given to Mr. Hate for? Could they perhaps be for the thoughts expressed through the act?

This brings us back to free-speech concerns. Whether or not HR-1913 itself would be used to stifle politically-incorrect criticism, there is no doubt that hate-crime laws in general are a transitional phase on the road to hate-speech laws. To illustrate why, consider how it is that a criminal act is deemed a hate crime. It is thus labeled when the perpetrator expresses displeasure with a group his victim is identified with during the commission of the act. But think about it: if the government can criminalize the expression of certain beliefs within one context, it is that much closer to criminalizing them within any context.

And, by and large, this is the goal of hate-crime law proponents. If they would deny this, I would issue the following challenge: if eliminating the violence in question really is your goal, let’s just increase the penalties for a given act to hate-crime levels regardless of the motivation. In other words, if you want “hate-crime” murderers to receive an extra 15 years, it can easily be accomplished by thus punishing all murderers. And if that level of punishment is needed to deter the behavior, doesn’t it make sense to apply it across-the-board? (I should mention an interesting contradiction here. Liberals have been scoffing at punishment for decades, lobbying against spanking and harsh sentences; they’ve called such things cruel and have often implied that they don’t even work. Yet, isn’t it funny that when it’s their emotional ox being gored, they suddenly believe harsh punishment is warranted and that its effectiveness is a given?)

But leftists won’t do this for a simple reason: they want to make a statement about the expression of certain ideas. Thus, they want individuals acting upon those ideas singled out for draconian punishment. And they can’t even defend their aims by likening them to broadcast indecency prohibitions. After all, it isn’t just group-specific epithets uttered during a crime that would bring hate-crime charges but anything relating a negative opinion about the group in question. In other words, they will punish not just mindless profanity, not just style, but also substance.

At the end of the day, hate-crime laws are yet another example of invidious leftist double standards. That is to say, if someone’s loved one is murdered because of good old-fashioned greed, will you be willing to look him in the eye and explain why it's just that the perpetrator gets a slap on the wrist relative to a politically-incorrect, "hateful" killer? If not, you have no business supporting hate-crime laws. 

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (8)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

schlottermann said:

Both ways So does this mean churches can stop worrying about being attacked by gay groups? I've been hearing about these homosexual groups vandalizing churches, and storming in scaring kids and causing problems for everyone in the service. It seems the gay community has gotten so focused on their own missions, that they've lost tolerance for the opinion of anyone else. They're doing the same thing that they are trying to stop. Hypocritical.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 30, 2009
Votes: +5

Pat Henry said:

OUTRAGEOUS! First, the concept of a "hate crime" in distinction to "crime" itself is an indicator that this is not rooted in law or common sense, but a positive construct being pushed by special pleading. Secondly, excluding pedophiles would not only help child abusers to get themselves off the hook, but would even have a platform for being legally aggressive against those who try to defend against them, including preaching against the behavior in our churches! Sexual orientation and gender identity--known mental disorders--"protected" against "hate crimes": In other words, people so immoral and unrestrained as to be crazed, could commit crimes, and someone trying to stop them or even CORRECT them with words could instead be prosecuted! This is (ahem) insane! In yet other words, if someone else tries to commit a sexually deviant act against my will and I retaliate or even remonstrate, the perpetrator could bring suit against _me_, and it their (perverted) perspective about what they thought I might have signaled could be grounds for their actions being justified, thus for _my punishment_. I correct myself: This is beyond insane. This is to turn the law and the whole common law on its head. If it passes, we are ergo a lawless society, governed by subjective judges.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 30, 2009
Votes: +0

danwhitehead1 said:

	These people are never going to stop The evil and the wicked never, ever stop. Remember the men of Sodom who wanted to get into Lot's house so they could rape his male visitors? What did they do when they were struck blind? They wearied themselves to find the door (Genesis 18:11)!!!
	report abuse vote down vote up

May 01, 2009
Votes: +0

danwhitehead1 said:

	Correction Genesis 19:11, not 18:11
	report abuse vote down vote up

May 01, 2009
Votes: +1

MarkGlen said:

	Tolerance The enemy is never tolerant. And neither should we be tolerant. But how we deal with intolerance is where the difference is.
	report abuse vote down vote up

May 01, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

violet said:

ridiculous scare tactics to conflate pedophilia and gender identity disorder is to starkly reveal a complete lack of understanding of what gender identity disorders really are. the text of the bill reads: "At the request of a State, local, or tribal law enforcement agency, the Attorney General may provide technical, forensic, prosecutorial, or any other form of assistance in the criminal investigation or prosecution of any crime that... is motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, or is a violation of the State, local, or tribal hate crime laws." there is not a word in there about pedophilia. vicious crimes against gay and transgendered people are becoming incredibly common, and this law gives law enforcement and prosecutors tools to respond more strongly to crimes in which victims were targeted because of their sexual orientation, disability, or gender identity. the passage of this bill should be heralded as a significant step forward in stopping the hateful violence and discrimination experienced on an almost daily basis by those it protects. you should all be ashamed of yourselves.

report abuse vote down vote up

May 03, 2009
Votes: +2

William Simpson said:

... In defence of people like me who were sexually molested and victims of a homosexual pedophile, I will never be silet in my opposition to the gay rights agenda. It is extremly irritating to watch our legislative process be overrun by a small minority of people who are completly intolerant of how another person is made to feel. My anger is more accurately directed to the masses who are indifferent, and doing nothing to stop this idiocy... The entire government body should be fired and the people have power to do this. Someone else please stand up!!!

report abuse vote down vote up

May 06, 2009 | url
Votes: +0

erleclaire said:

14th ammendment enforced equaly with equality or a lie? As a Faithful Christian and now a senior citizen, I am torn over the hate and danger I face daily. I am a woman, even though I was not originally designated such. I am legally and anatomically female, but born Transsexual/Intersex. Where I represented 1/30,000 when born, now 1/87 children are born Transsexual/Intersex, with 1/2000 ambiguous where the doctor cannot determine sex or gender. Since I was born in a state where birth records can be amended I was able to not only correct birth anomaly, but my records as well. I am a veteran having served this country honorably, also serving the White House under several Presidents and Foreign dignitaries, including Mikhail Gorbechev of the Soviet Union. Additionally, I have served support roles with the Law Enforcement community, DHS, TSA, and civilian roles for the US Navy, and US Army. I have earned my right to full citizenship, yet I am denied due diligence under the law. As a group of Constitutionalists, you yourself have a claim in defending 14th amendment citizen’s common rights and protections. I am often denied public access, police protection, and medical services. What banner should I carry in support of a nation that does not live by it's own laws and the inalienable rights of citizens? Personally, I am equally at odds with Washington, as I am the sleepy hollows around this nation. A nation of fraud!

report abuse vote down vote up

May 06, 2009
Votes: +2