With the Hate Crime Bill safely embedded in the Defense Authorization legislation (S.1390) which has now passed the Senate, the Washington Postâ€™s
columnist Richard Cohen has surfaced with a strong essay denouncing it: The Folly of Hate-Crime Laws
Tuesday, August 4, 2009.
Why, one might ask, now? Why not earlier in the summer, when this disgrace was getting its scandalously limited Congressional exposure (a whole two hours of hearings!)?
My guess is Cohen got â€?dissuadedâ€? from publishing his column in a timely fashion. The ruthless discipline
which got every
Democratic Senator not literally on his deathbed out in the middle of night to vote for Cloture would certainly extend to the Washington Postâ€™
s editorial process.
The column itself is excellent, particularly since Cohen grasps a crucial fact: the Hate Crime concept is about taking the opportunity of a criminal act to additionally punish the accused for his opinions. Speaking of the Holocaust Museum shooting
â€¦what`s being punished is thought or speechâ€¦. The penalty for murder is severe, so it`s not as if the crime is not being punished. The added "late hit" of a hate crime is without any real consequence, except as a precedent for the punishment of belief or speech. Slippery slopes are supposedly all around us, I know, but this one is the real McCoy.
Cohen illustrates by hypothesizing a â€?group of drunken toughsâ€? attacking one of the privileged minorities:
if, in fact, they kept their mouths shut, refrained from the N-word or the F-word or the K-word, and simply made the beating or the killing seem one triggered by dissing or some other reason, then they would not be accused of hate — merely of murder or some such trifle. If, though, they gave vent to their thoughts, they would be in for real trouble.
The only thing that can be guaranteed about this legislation is that its effects
will spread further
than expected. As the Rev. Ted Pike notes in his latest gloomy but important
Also, judges, legislating hate law from the bench, could set judicial precedents that would protect favored groups not only from physical, bias-motivated violence but also "verbal" violenceâ€¦.In addition, a federal hate law will stimulate what is already happening throughout America in cases too numerous to list: State and local prosecutors, with little regard for Constitutional restraint, criminalize and even jail individuals for "hate speech" alone — speech with no hint of performing or encouraging violence.
This is precisely the aspect which so delighted
the revolting Senator Diane Feinstein (Totalitarian-CA) in her tantrum during the Billâ€™s brief hearing.
Adding insult to injury, Attorney General Holderâ€™s admission that Whites and Christians are to be second class citizens
is having influence
Christians Can`t Be Victims Of `Hate Crime` posted by JRed Look Up Fellowship
Aug 3 2009
Oklahoma`s Harvest Chapel church members were shocked to find the inside of their little church building totally destroyed by vandals last weekâ€¦After asking if it could be considered a "hate crime", Pastor Carol Hoke said she was told that the state of Oklahoma only considers it a hate crime if it involves homosexuality, or racial issues
(See also Vandals Destroy Sapulpa Chapel By Jennifer Loren, The News On 6
Concern that, essentially, the people who built this country should be less protected than what Cohen calls
politically significant groups — blacks, Hispanics, Jews, gays, etc
is not just a matter of pride. Bad guys are not always irrational. Sometimes they want to vandalize property. Sometimes they want to set up protection rackets. As I pointed out discussing a case of the latter in Omaha
If an extortionist realizes penalties are higher if he targets a minority business, wonâ€™t that encourage him to target businesses owned by whites instead?
Repealing all this Hate Crime Legislation must be an urgent objective of the next Republican Congress.