July 21, 2004

WHILE THEY FRET ABOUT IMPRISONED JIHADIS (via Tom Corcoran):

Federal Thought Crimes (Cliff Kincaid, July 19, 2004, Accuracy in Media)

The U.S. Senate has passed Ted Kennedy's so-called "hate crimes" bill. In the words of the Traditional Values Coalition, it will criminalize a person's thoughts and provides unequal penalties for the same crime—depending upon the motivation of the accused. That means that the media that possibly provoked or influenced commission of the crime will come in for scrutiny. Yet our liberal media have remained silent on the constitutional and First Amendment implications of this approach.

Some, mostly on the conservative right, are speaking out. Besides the Traditional Values Coalition, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation has denounced the bill, noting that France has pursued the same approach in the prosecution of Brigette Bardot for a book she wrote critical of Islam. The Republican Study Committee produced an analysis of the Kennedy approach that concludes that it creates a federal "thought crime." The approach requires that prosecutors inquire into "an offender's overall philosophy or biases…" It declares, "The Kennedy bill makes philosophy, politics, biases, and general viewpoints the subject of almost every violent crime."


Which makes it especially amusing to hear Senator Kennedy or Kerry prattle on about how the war on terror is eroding our civil liberties.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 21, 2004 2:49 PM
Comments

Motive is not crime.

Posted by: Scof at July 21, 2004 3:07 PM

There is a very short step from this sort of thing to "Chrestianos ad leones!", which we may already be seeing in places like Europe and Canada. If you hold that X is sinful, the practitioners of X may feel threatened.

Additionally, I might add that thirty or so years ago any legal scholar would have considered this sort of thing d.o.a. on First Amendment grounds, but of course, they would have sais the same thing about McCain-Feingold.

Posted by: Lou Gots at July 21, 2004 4:22 PM

Did it pass the House" Did Bush sign it? Will he?

Posted by: Tom at July 21, 2004 4:33 PM

Did it pass the House? Did Bush sign it? Will he?

Posted by: Tom at July 21, 2004 4:33 PM

Canadian federal law prohibits anyone from publishing materials or speaking in any way that "exposes or tends to expose to hatred, ridicules, belittles or otherwise affronts the dignity of any person, any class of persons of a group of persons ..." [because of his/her race, color, sexual preference, religion, and so on].

In 2002 a Saskatchewan court case determined the Bible to be hate literature -- specifically in a newspaper ad showing pictures of bumper stickers for sale. The bumper stickers cited (variously) Romans 1:24-27, Lev 18:22, 20:13, or 1 Corithians 6:9-10 on the left side, an equals sign, and on the right side a diagonal "ban" circle over a silhouette of two men holding hands.

http://www.canlii.org/sk/cas/skqb/2002/2002skqb506.html

Posted by: Gideon at July 21, 2004 10:22 PM

Which republican senators voted for it?

Posted by: Robert Duquette at July 23, 2004 1:53 PM
« THAT GIANT SUCKING SOUND--US ABSORBING THEIR BEST: | Main | WAS ANDREW SULLIVAN RIGHT? »