One can argue that the best way to point out the idiocy of hate crime as a category is to apply it to everything.
Gordon Zaft | Homepage | 11.26.02 - 3:20 pm | #

Except that once we grant the government even more incentive and power to regulate our thoughts, they will be loathe to give it back. We're better off fighting current hate crime legislation than encouraging more.

(at this point, Mark has a heart attack that I just agreed with him)
andy | Homepage | 11.26.02 - 6:03 pm | #

Not at all. Spoken like a true libertarian. And libertarians are usually closer to reality than statists. However, since they think of the individual rather than the family as the basic unit of society, they are often wrong too.
Mark Shea | Homepage | 11.26.02 - 6:27 pm | #

Hate crimes laws are on the books at the behest of African-American, Jewish, gay, and Muslim groups. Mainstream Christian groups didn't ask for these laws, but they are there and are already being used to punish politically incorrect thoughts. If religiously motivated crimes are committed against Christians, then it is only just that the same laws be applied.

In Rod Dreher's article, he points out that the vandals of Mary Queen of the World Cathedral in Montreal were only charged with trespassinng after burning crosses and strewing condoms and excrement around the Church - a clear act of desecration. If it had been a Mosque or Synagogue similarly vandalized, or a gay bookstore, there is no doubt hate crimes laws would have been used. But authorities are very reluctant to call crimes against Christian churches hate crimes.

I personally know of other cases here in Ottawa, Canada where churches had the Blessed Sacrament stolen, and where statues of Our Lady were vandalized, but police chalked them up to "rowdy kids" and would not categorize them as religiously motivated hate crimes, despite the fact that the local police has an active hate crimes unit that has been used, for instance, to intimidate Christians who have spoken against homosexuality in the media.

At the political level, I certainly agree that we should work against the concept of "hate crimes". But where such laws are in place, it is equally important to fight to have them fairly applied, and not just used to magnify offenses committed against officially favoured victim groups and downplay the reality that much if not most religiously motivated hatred is directed towards Christians.
Mark Cameron | 11.26.02 - 6:44 pm | #

I hate hate crimes legislation.

Using their stupid laws against them will only sink us farther into the relativistic quagmire with them.
Jeff Miller | Homepage | 11.26.02 - 6:44 pm | #

To me this isn't so much a "hate crime" as it's terrorism. Just as bin Laden et al want to eradicate resistance to Islam, so the purveyors of homosexual preference politics want to eradicate all resistance to homosexuality. The threat is real. Resistance is imperative.
Gregg The Obscure | Homepage | 11.26.02 - 7:22 pm | #

As a thinking gay man, I agree that using the term "hate crime" to inflict a stiffer sentence smacks of "thought policing"; if an individual is unprovokedly attacked then try them for that and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law, but their motive is essentially unimportant.

However, there are two components of hate crime laws that is needed in some instances:

1- the registration of certain crimes in order to compile statistical data that may help the FBI and other interstate agencies track currents in criminology (for example, the ability to determine that certain crimes may be connected)

2- the proviso that if local law enforcement does not pursue a demographically based crime then a higher agency may step in (useful particularly in small towns- for example, a violence against blacks in small town Florida received no action due to the "good ol' boy" mentality of law enforcement until the state intervened

I completely agree that motive should not be an issue in prosecution or sentencing as it is subjective at best and arguably a violation of the First Amendment, but a much stronger case can be made for the other provisions.

Jon Darby | 11.26.02 - 11:33 pm | #

Jon, you could avoid all your angst by simply (I know you'll like this adverb) giving up the homosexualness and going natural. There are track records that this can be done. You say you are a thinking man; well, think about exploring this possibility.
John L. Sillasen | 11.27.02 - 12:00 am | #

John S. -- Being gay IS natural (for gays); it's normal, too. You obviously have no understanding whatever of the issues.

Why don't you THINK a bit about it? Maybe you could give up heterosexuality? Just decide to be gay, and then . . .

Really, GROW UP.
Anon | 11.27.02 - 1:05 am | #

Greg the Obscure writes:

To me this isn't so much a "hate crime" as it's terrorism. Just as bin Laden et al want to eradicate resistance to Islam, so the purveyors of homosexual preference politics want to eradicate all resistance to homosexuality. The threat is real. Resistance is imperative.

What is the difference between a hate crime and terrorism? The arguments against special hate crime statutes also apply to special anti-terrorism laws. Arson, mass murder, and the destruction of private property were illegal before
9/11/01. Why are extra laws needed?

Murder was illegal before this woman was murdered, why is a special law needed?

BTW there more states which protect Christians under hate crime statutes, than there are states which protect homosexuals.
Anonymous | 11.27.02 - 8:03 am | #

John Sillasen writes:

Jon, you could avoid all your angst by simply (I know you'll like this adverb) giving up the homosexualness and going natural. There are track records that this can be done. You say you are a thinking man; well, think about exploring this possibility.

Chinese Catholics can also renounce their faith to avoid their persecution.

John, if it were as easy as morons like you seem to think, why would anyone raise the issue?

Now go play in traffic.
Anonymous | 11.27.02 - 8:06 am | #

"John Sillasen writes:

Jon, you could avoid all your angst by simply (I know you'll like this adverb) giving up the homosexualness and going natural."

Hey, I never thought about that! Maybe I'll give it a try...

If anybody needs me, I'll be holed up in my bedroom watching SPICE GIRLS videos and reading DIESEL MECHANICS MONTHLY trying to get a handle on this "heterosexualness" thing.

J

PS- You've no idea how much I tried to avoid the "homosexualness" thing; in those days I was a fairly devout Christian and even attempted the prayer route, as well as the "ignore it and it'll go away" route (which works about as well with gayness as it does with Jehovah's Witnesses at the door). I can't assert with hard evidence that it's a genetic disposition (though my presently-unverifiable opinion is that it is), but I can most definitely assure you that whatever the origin, it's on the hard-drive.
Caveat: don't EVER let your sister/daughter/distaff relative of any form date an "ex" gay guy unless she just really has no fashion sense. It's rather like being an ex-white guy; he can dye his skin and curl his hair and subscribe to Ebony all he wants, but as soon as The Carpenters start playing on the Hi-Fi you can rest assured he'll be humming along- he just can't help it.
Jon Darby | 11.27.02 - 10:16 am | #

I am interested in the comment above that uses the phrase "demographically based crime." If we start to classify crimes as 'hate crimes' or 'demographically based crimes' then we surrender our civilization and return to tribalism...which is what a significant portion of our society wants to do. The baby-boomer socialists strive to divorce the citizenry from this "America" concept, and convince people that they are wholly defined by their sex, class and race, and nothing more. Everyone becomes a victim [except white males]. The only hope for advancement against such a sexist, racist machine is to fight fire with fire and use whatever reverse discrimination the current will allow...retribution....protect your tribe.

The whole concept of American [and most of western thought for that matter] is that humanity extends beyond tribalism. You are more than your sex, class or race. You are your education, your creativity and your contribution. You are your family and your community, and justice stands above your need to avenge and protect your own minority at the expense of others.
Larry Kropp | Homepage | 11.27.02 - 12:53 pm | #

Jon Darby, you don't mention trying what is essential to Christianity, which is self sacrifice. Of course, your "Christian" efforts didn't work, because you tried only a superficial level of it. Get to the meat of Christianity, sacrifice your desires. Start with little sacrifices, and progress to bigger and more difficult ones. The choice is yours: cut the reliance on frills, and get down to the soul of the issue.
John L. Sillasen | 12.01.02 - 11:19 pm | #

Anon: I play in traffic all the time, and have been doing it for years ... decades. What I do now is drive a lifted Jeep which drives wobbly on mountain roads and trails; it's terrifying.

But you are right about me needing to grow up. I've been working on this problem for decades. There are sacrifices I've had to make, things people generally can't come to grips with. But they're not meant to.

You're right about me not knowing how hard it is to give up homosexuality; what I've had to leave behind was not so good, either. In my case I wanted to bail out. I tried for years. Finally I let God know that I would give up everything for His grace. He gave me a list, which I set about accomplishing. Read Job; it will give you the idea of the route I took.

If you do these primal Christian acts, then God will give you grace. What the grace will "look" like will be for you only. I've tried to express my graces to others, but no one really sees what I say. It is hard enough to convince people that God will transform those who are in real need of it. For me it is not a hope, because I've been there, experienced the transformation, and understand how it came about.

Christianity is simple. What you say you've done as Christian seems complex and beating around the bush, maybe to impress others that you are trying. But when you try to pull such a number on somebody who has been the route, it doesn't fly.
John L. Sillasen | 12.01.02 - 11:36 pm | #

Jon Darby: The Carpenters??? Get yourself some Gregorian Chant, and chant along with it. Trust me, it's better. Instead of stirring up the emotions, it has been perfected to arouse the spirit, the soul, to approach God.

You could even take up some of the neat evangelical/fundamentalist songs, but as salvific as these are they'll take you a bit out of the way and thus longer before you're getting into what Catholicism is about.
John L. Sillasen | 12.01.02 - 11:46 pm | #