Click Here North Star Writers Group
Syndicated Content.
Opinion.
Humor.
Features.
OUR WRITERS ABOUT US  • COLUMNISTS   NEWS/EVENTS  FORUM ORDER FORM RATES MANAGEMENT CONTACT
Political/Op-Ed
Eric Baerren
Lucia de Vernai
Herman Cain
Dan Calabrese
Alan Hurwitz
Paul Ibrahim
David Karki
Llewellyn King
Nancy Morgan
Nathaniel Shockey
Stephen Silver
Candace Talmadge
Jessica Vozel
Feature Page
David J. Pollay - The Happiness Answer
Cindy Droog - The Working Mom
The Laughing Chef
Humor
Mike Ball - What I've Learned So Far
Bob Batz - Senior Moments
D.F. Krause - Business Ridiculous
Roger Mursick - Twisted Ironies
 
 
 
 
 
David Karki
  David's Column Archive
 

May 7, 2007

Congress’s ‘Hate Crime’ Against the Constitution

 

The U.S. House of Representatives today passed a bill, 237 to 180, that would expand the definition of "hate crimes" to include gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. While this sounds right and noble on its face, and puts those who would oppose it in the position of appearing to desire or motivate crimes against these people (which, I'm sure, is quite deliberate on the part of those offering the bill), the fact is that this bill could not be a bigger affront to the constitutional principle and equal protection under law.

 

And the fact that 237 representatives who have sworn an oath to uphold that document think this bill comports with it is a far more frightening prospect than any "hate crime."

 

The practical effect of this law, as with all "hate crime" laws, would be to make the punishment for a violent crime entirely dependent upon the demographic groups to which the victim happened to belong. This trashes the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment in that it punishes criminals differently for having perpetrated the same crime. Moreover, it does not equally protect the citizenry; if a murderer knows he'll get less time in jail for killing me than for my darker-skinned gay female neighbor, he's more likely to attack me as a result. My life is not worth less (or more) than my neighbor's, and as such government has no business trying to draw distinctions between us.

 

"Hate crime" laws – as if there is really any such thing as a "love crime" – are really just a method by which liberals codify their left-wing politically correct prejudices into law, and then subsequently use them as club to intimidate into silence, by bludgeoning with empty accusations of bigotry, any who would stand against their effort. The truth of the matter is that these same liberals are practicing the very bigotry they so pompously, if disingenuously, condemn by seeing people only as members of groups. And in so doing, they are denying rather than securing to certain individuals the inalienable rights with which their Creator endowed them. To liberals, I guess some really are more equal than others.

 

Simple common sense defeats the supposed logic behind this bill, on several fronts. First, a crime is a crime is a crime. The motivation thereof is irrelevant. It is the behavior that matters. You punish those convicted of the same crime with the same penalty because they did the same thing, and in so doing equitably protect the public to the best of your ability. Second, all of the behavior referenced in this bill is already illegal in all 50 states. It is therefore both completely unnecessary and an illegal federal intrusion into state and local jurisdiction. Last, trying to establish degrees of crime based on what the criminal was thinking not only erodes moral culpability for one's own actions but smacks of Orwellian totalitarianism. This might be a more real threat than it seems, given the extent to which this could be used as a trojan horse to silence Christians and others of faith who speak and preach against homosexuality as "promoting hate." In that respect, this bill violates the First Amendment as well. And when 237 representatives have already trashed two amendments in one bill, don't bet they won't try for three.

 

Even the name of the bill demonstrates how ludicrous it is: "The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007."  If it's local, why is Congress passing it and forcing illegitimate federal law on top of the state prohibitions already in place? And as opposed to crimes motivated by love or jealously or neglect? And finally, the only way to definitively prevent a crime is to carry a concealed firearm on your person. No legislation ever has or will prevent a determined criminal from committing his heinous act. (Congressional magic-wand-waving notwithstanding.)

 

So, other than not being local and not preventing anything, and other than the fact that there's no such thing as a "hate crime," the title is right on target. Now if only we could actually scare up the nerve to impeach congressmen for constitutional hate crimes . . .

 

© 2007 North Star Writers Group. May not be republished without permission.

 

Click here to talk to our writers and editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.

 

To e-mail feedback about this column, click here. If you enjoy this writer's work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry it.

This is Column # DKK059. Request permission to publish here.