« Why Reject Obamacare? | Main | Rush Revealed »



For some reason I'm still shocked when you print trashy lies and present it as fact.

"Ugly as hate is, it still should not be against the law to hate someone - as long as the hate doesn't translate into criminal action".

Well it isn't and never will be. Hate crime legislation increases penalties for violent acts not for free speech nor thought. But you already knew that, didn't you.

""bust whitey's hump" laws. Gosh, just another rich white man being put upon.

"Why should it be more serious if someone kills someone because they are Jewish or black or gay?"

Why?! Because it profoundly affects the core identity of a whole class of people. Why do Jews still talk about the horror of the Holocast? In your view they were just a bunch of murders, no different than a poisoned chocolate in an Agathy Christy novel.


Of course trying to annihilate an entire group of people is incredibly evil. Would it have been less evil, however, if Hitler had tried to kill all the school teachers in Europe? Or everyone with naturally red hair?

What is wrong with hate crimes is that it selects certain groups of people and gives them a status above and beyond that of other people. Explain why a Jew or a black or a gay person should be protected by "hate crime laws" - but not short people. Or people with foreign accents. Or, as I said above, athletes or lawyers.

Hate is ugly and wrong. But criminalizing thought should never occur. Punish the crime, and use "thought" like intent or accident to adjudicate. Do not use how much that person may have liked or disliked the victim.

The comments to this entry are closed.