Hate crimes in Canada

Barack Obama supports hate crimes legislation. Those who think this is a good idea might want to consider where such legislation has led in Canada:

British Columbia now bans all words and images "likely to expose a person ... to hatred or contempt" because of race, religion, age, disability, sex, marital status or sexual orientation." This sounds like a libel law for groups, except that libel is a misstatement of fact that damages an individual reputation. In the United States, for a public figure to be libeled, the false statement has to be made maliciously or recklessly.

The Canadian idea of hate speech is less specific and more dangerous. Hate is like obscenity, about which Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart famously said, "I know it when I see it." The difference is that a ban on obscenity does not touch political
discourse, and a ban on hate does (Seattle Times).

Yeah, I know. America has the First Amendment so it could never happen here. I find it ironic that supporters of hate crimes bills who think it could never happen here are often the very ones who complained so bitterly about how the Bush Administration has supposedly trampled on our Constitutional protections over the last seven years. (Hat tip: Kevin).

Kill Christians and Jews in Detroit

A flyer saying "Kill Christians and Jews" was placed on cars in Detroit. I wonder if this will be treated as a hate crime. Probably not. See Jihad Watch.

More on Pelosi and hate speech

CNSNews confronted Nancy Pelosi directly about the anti-Christian hate poster in San Francisco:

CNSNews.com:"I'd like to get local for a second and talk about what's going on
in San Francisco. Your spokesman told the Bay Area Reporter that the Folsom
Street Fair advertisement mocking the last supper would not harm Christianity.
I'm wondering if you find the advertisement personally offensive."

"And as a follow up, the city's Grants for the Arts program, funded by the city's hotel tax, subsidizes the fair. Do you think that it's fair to tax everyone who visits San Francisco and stays in a hotel to support the fair?"

Pelosi: "Well that's not really a local question. That's a constitutional question. That's a religious question. That's as big a global question as you can ask. I'm a big believer in First Amendment and therefore, as I said in my statement, I do not believe that Christianity has been harmed by the Folsom Street Fair advertising."

Maybe Ms. Pelosi is right. Maybe this is a constitutional question. If a public school cannot even put a manger scene in a Christmas program because it supposedly violates the principle of separation of church and state, how can it NOT violate the same principle for the city of San Francisco to use tax dollars to promote anti-Christian bigotry?

As for freedom of speech, CNSNews was not asking Ms. Pelosi to outlaw the poster. They just wanted to know if she found it personally offensive—she would undoubtedly be the first to condemn an offensive poster attacking gay groups. Her non-answer was loud and clear.

Nancy Pelosi and hate speech

On September 25 Recliner Commentaries posted “Tolerance, San Francisco style, about the gay group that is promoting an event using a poster of people dressed in sadomasochistic garb, arranged like a famous picture of the Last Supper. The table is filled with sex toys.

If anyone had used something similarly offensive against Muhammad there would likely be blood in the streets in cities around the world. If something similarly offensive had been publicized against gays, blacks, or women, members of Congress would be falling all over themselves to promote their new hate speech bill. Yet, according to a report in the Christian Newswire, when Nancy Pelosi was asked point blank about the poster, she refused to condemn it!

This is very disturbing. We’re not talking about some fringe loony like Rosie O’Donnell or Cindy Sheehan. Ms. Pelosi is the Speaker of the House and one of the most powerful Democrats in the country! Yet, if the report is accurate, Ms. Pelosi will not even condemn the most vicious, vile anti-Christian hate speech!

The torture of Megan Williams

Six white trash low-lifes kidnapped and tortured a young black woman named Megan Williams. For an entire week, they locked her in a small storage shed calling racial slurs while raping her, stabbing her, beating her, pouring hot water on her, choking her with a cable cord, and making her drink from a toilet and forcing her to eat rat droppings.

Prosecutors have decided not to press for hate crimes charges because the state’s hate crimes laws allow up to a10 year penalty while regular kidnapping charges bring up to a life penalty (AP).

Do you think Ms. Williams will ever get over this? Is it really justice to put these people away for life while the tax payers spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide for their food, shelter, clothing, medical and dental care for the rest of their lives?

Quite frankly, I think it may be time to repeal the amendment against cruel and unusual punishment. These animals should be publically horse-whipped and burned alive at the stake.

Hate crimes in middle school

For many people, middle school was a bit like purgatory: temporary but very painful. That’s because middle school kids can be extraordinarily cruel. This was the case in Lewiston Maine where some middle school students “placed a ham steak in a bag on a lunch table where Somali students were eating.”

One of the Somali students said he suddenly felt alone, like everyone was against him, like he didn’t fit in. He no longer felt safe and said he would remember this for the rest of his life. The “Center for the Prevention of Hate Violence is working with the school to create a response plan” and the police are investigating the incident as a hate crime (Hot Air, Sun Journal).

I have three observations on this incident:

First, I think it is sad and disgusting when people do things like this. Recliner Commentaries similarly condemned the actions of someone in Tennessee who wrote obscenities in a Qur’an, smeared it with bacon, and placed it on the steps of a Mosque.

Second, we have to remember, however, that this incident took place in middle school! I know a man in prison who told me that it was literally much harder for him in middle school than it is in prison (he was being quite serious).

Middle school kids are known for their insensitivity and cruelty. They will mock other students’ names, physical features, clothing, interests, economic background, race, religion, intelligence (or lack thereof)—virtually anything that can be mocked is open season in Middle School.

What happened at this middle school is not nearly as much about ham or Islam as it is about middle school cruelty, and that is the broader issue that needs to be addressed. Focusing solely on ham and Islam is simply political correctness run amok.

Unfortunately, like millions of others, the prisoner I know was not part of a politically correct protected group when he was in middle school and had no recourse against the cruelty.

Third, the fact that this incident is being investigated as a hate crime is really quite disturbing. When someone beats a gay person just because the person is gay, that is a hate crime—but what exactly was the crime in this school? As far as I know, it’s not a crime to place a ham sandwich on a table.

So does the crime consist in the fact that these Muslims were mocked? If so, will it now also be a crime to mock Christians and Christianity in schools? (I’ve had to endure classes in which Christianity was openly mocked by the teachers!). If not, are we saying that some groups are worthy of more protection than others? (discrimination)

The problem with the idea of hate crimes is that we are already quickly moving toward turning non-crimes into actual crimes simply because some selected groups—protected by political correctness—are offended by the words or actions or others.

If Muslims, or blacks or gays can charge people with hate crimes simply because they feel offended, why can’t Christians, or Jews, or Hispanics, or Asians, or women, or blonds, or short people, or tall people, or fat people, or disabled people or elderly people, or children also file hate crime lawsuits when they feel they have been slandered or attacked?

Hate crimes legislation has the potential of being the most serious threat to free speech in the history of America. The only ones who really win are the lawyers who will be rolling in dough (And I’ve probably just committed a hate crime against lawyers).