Today’s column over at WorldNetDaily revolves around an asinine bill co-sponsored by Ted Kennedy that expands hate crime laws to include homosexuals, transsexuals, etc.

Why is this an intrusive tool of what is destined to be a totalitarian state disguised as “civil rights legislation”? Read “If Mary Jo Kopechne had been transgender” for the full story.

Update from the email bag:

Plenty of email this morning, mostly from people who see exactly where “hate crime” laws are leading, but here’s a dissenter from across the pond.

Sarah from the UK writes:

Everytime I read something regarding hate crime laws come up I start to groan as you always tend to get the drivel you came out with in the above named “article”.

A hate crime law doesn’t make anyone a “special” victim. The jews in world war 2 who we’re sent to the deaths in the concentration camps were “hate crime” victims, as the only reason they we’re singled out was because they we’re jews, not because they had done something to deserve it, simply because of their religion.

As long Christian Pastors remember that they’re Christians, then what have they got to fear? They can say that being Gay is sinfull if they want, that’s they’re right under your first ammendment. They’re wrong off course, as it’s not being Gay that’s sinful, it’s the act of sex outside of marriage and sex for non-procreation that is considered sinful by the bible, so does that make Gay people more sinful than hetersexual people, or just sinful in different ways, as I don’t think that everytime a heterosexual couple has sex they have a baby nine months later.

Instead of shooting down a hate crimes bill, try adding to it, try making it more inclusive. If you are attacked because of your beliefs, then that’s someone having a difference of opinion with you, ie they know you. If they attack you because you’re the first white person they see, that’s a hate crime, as it’s nothing you’ve done knowingly or not, it’s simply because of your colour. Likewise, if someone attacks the first person coming out of a church, or temple or mosque and they attack them simply because they’re Christian or Jewish or Muslim, then that’s a hate crime too, and if someone is attacked simply for being gay, then that is a hate crime too.

I simply don’t understand what you don’t understand about hate crimes.

Sarah, as expected, didn’t answer the basic question: why should the punishment be more severe for attacking (verbally or physically) a member of one group as opposed to a group not mentioned in the “hate crime” legislation?

Those who can’t see the danger inherent in allowing politicians to pick and choose which groups are deserving of special protection are part of the reason history repeats itself.

Those who can’t see the danger inherent in allowing politicians to pick and choose which groups are deserving of special protection are part of the reason history repeats itself.

Those who c … nevermind, you get the point.

Comments

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.