Exposing Bogus "Hate Crime" Legislation: The Attempt to Destroy Free Speech

Here are 5 important considerations:

1. "Got Ya Covered"

Hate crimes of a violent nature are already covered by existing law and most violent crimes involve hate. Even if one doesn't consist of hate, the harm would be the same and the punishment should be equal. Hate crime laws are redundant, unnecessary and do not help matters. We'll explore some reasons that most "hate crime" laws are established, momentarily.

2. The First Amendment

In Louisiana, Jeremiah Munsen was charged with a hate crime for displaying a rope on his vehicle. Does he have any First Amendment rights? It is frightening that he could face up to a year in jail for being politically incorrect and having his freedom of speech taken away by "hate crime" laws that trump the U.S. Constitution. Bear in mind he committed no act of violence or bodily injury upon anyone, and he did not transport anyone over state lines to sell them into slavery. It appears he was using a symbol as a form of free expression, regardless of how offensive or unpopular it was.

Do I agree with what he did? No... Do I like him? No.... Do I believe in the First Amendment? Yes. While I believe this young man should possibly face both instigation and civil charges, consider number 3 and number 4, below::

3. Do The Jews Count?

How often have we seen swastika tattoos, Nazi style motorcycle helmets and emblems of the SS on the majority of days we walk out the door? What are we to think about the Nazis marching in Illinois, overtly terrorizing the Jews? Concerning a ruling, Wikipedia relates: "Since other people were allowed to march..., the neo-Nazis should be allowed to march too." Consider how flagrant an organized march such as this is, compared to driving through a street with a symbol on your truck. Why were the neo-Nazis granted First Amendment rights?

I suppose that a Jewish person would have an easier time getting into an affirmative action program than he would getting enrolled into the hate crime protection program.

4. Eating a Banana with One's Ear

Presently, the radical homosexual extremists are attempting to remove the First Amendment right to freedom of speech with "hate crime" legislation. Describing the proper usage of the human anatomy, even if referring to a biology textbook while doing so could result in a commission of what could be considered one of the worst crimes in America.

Consider the following: You sit down to dinner, your door bell rings, and federal agents are there to charge and arrest you for a "hate crime" because you were overheard saying, "Ears are for hearing, and not for chewing."

The American Family Association makes us aware of the following:

"A California lawsuit which is now headed to the U.S. Supreme Court would make the use of the words 'natural family,' 'marriage' and 'union of a man and a woman' a 'hate speech' crime in government workplaces. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled in favor of the plaintiffs."

"CNN and The Washington Post both reported that General Peter Pace, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was fired because of his publicly expressed moral opposition to homosexual behavior."

"A bill now before Congress (H.R. 1592 / S. 1105) would criminalize negative comments concerning homosexuality, such as calling the practice of homosexuality a sin from the pulpit, a 'hate crime' punishable by a hefty fine and time in prison. This dangerous legislation would take away our freedom of speech and our freedom of religion."

Ladies and gentlemen, I respectfully submit that the radical gays are bringing about these bogus "hate crime" laws as a weapon they'll use against others, in order to advance their agenda and selfish interests. This is an audacious attempt to silence people and violate their First Amendment right of free speech. Please contact the President and your representatives to protest all of the unconstitutional so-called "hate crime" bills. Don't forget, Gay Marriage was defeated in many states, and this attempt to railroad honest individuals into the slammer can also be stopped.

5. Juries Can Nullify

In "6 Factors that Could Prevent a Fair Trial in America," I explain how jurors can vote "Not Guilty" if they determine a law to be unfair, or if political factors are involved. Depending upon the circumstances, it could possibly apply to a "hate crime" - please keep that in mind.

This is not a matter of race, or other biased factors for me. I stand for fairness.

www.wikipedia.org

www.afa.net