So what exactly is a “Hate” crime? I have always had this silly notion that any crime was by definition, an expression of hate. Liberals though will tell you it is any crime committed against a person where the victims skin color, sexual orientation or, if you are a Muslim, religious beliefs were a factor considered by the perpetrator in the commission of a crime.
Lets be honest, crimes against Christians and conservatives are still widely tolerated by most in the media and especially liberals. Only Muslims and liberal Democrats are not to be offended.
Given that definition why didn’t many of the proponents of “hate” crime legislation consider the 911 attacks a “hate” crime? It is a plain fact we were targeted because we were, among other reasons, non-Muslims. In other words we were attacked, in part or in whole, because of our religious beliefs. I don’t know about anyone else but the whole “man caused disaster” spiel coming from the current occupant of the white house and his pathological shills is more than a little unsettling to me.
Liberals have some funny notions when it comes to crime and criminals. They believe that most white criminals decide on who to victimize based on the aforementioned characteristics of race, sexual orientation etc. In their heart of hearts liberals believe that there are only three types of “hate” crimes. These consist of white on black crimes, white straight on gay crimes and white Christian on non-Christian crimes. Like the demonstrably false concept that poverty is the root of all crime, these beliefs are carved in stone and are to be accepted by all without question.
Suppose a roving mob of black teenagers beat to death an old white guy while yelling that his beating was simple payback for slavery. Asking a liberal to call this brutality a hate crime would be similar to asking the sun to rise in the west and set in the east. Their principles simply will not allow for it. It simply does not fit the liberal hate crime template.
Still, in the liberal mindset, it feels good to punish someone more harshly for violating the “civil rights” of an allegedly “oppressed” minority. Few understand feeling good better than liberals.
I suppose I could consider supporting a “hate” crime bill if I could get this one question satisfactorily answered. Please explain to me why it is more wrong to rob a black person than a white person, more wrong to kill a gay person than a heterosexual person or more wrong to attack a Muslim than a Christian?
Indulge me in another question. Why is it that white, heterosexual Christians are fair game for hate crime prosecution while blacks, Muslims and atheists are not? Can anyone cite a case where a non-white was prosecuted under “hate” crime laws? I did a brief search of the internet that yielded no results, although I am sure there must be some somewhere. There must be at least one non-politically correct prosecutor in the country. There were plenty of white racism stories though. Apparently, according to the media and Google, only white people commit “hate” crimes.
After listening to this “debate” for an interminable amount of time I think I understand what the true purpose of “hate” crime legislation is. It has little to do with crime. Think of it as a method of thought control. Under the guise of “hate” crimes legislation we are being told exactly how to think about certain concepts. Certain “classes” of people, certain types of behavior are to be given special legal status.
Under this concept it is only a short leap to having the very act of disapproving of “the gay lifestyle” constituting a hate crime. Questioning a devout Muslims “right” to kill his daughter for dating an infidel would constitute a hate crime. The prudent act of arresting a black looter would constitute a hate crime. This is a truly dangerous path to walk.
Lets face it, liberals are all about good intentions. As the old saying goes, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
I was always taught that some things are wrong simply because they are wrong. There is no other explanation needed or required. It makes no difference the color of your skin, who you choose to sleep with or what God you choose to worship. Some things are wrong simply because they are wrong.
The attempt to achieve “fairness” by making some people “more” protected than others based solely on arbitrary definitions of skin color, sex or religion defeats the very idea of justice. Justice is supposed to be blind. It is in that blindness that we achieve fairness.