Comments on: “Hate Crime” laws criminalize ideas

By: Today’s Lynch List « The Lynch Mob

Today’s Lynch List « The Lynch Mob — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 02:40:44 +0000

[...] a very relevant article by Don Watkins for the Ayn Rand Center: “Hate Crime” laws criminalize ideas: The House recently voted to expand federal “hate crimes” to include those committed because of [...]

By: TJ Dolinar

TJ Dolinar — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:51:13 +0000

Well said. The unraveling of rights always begins with a tug of an undesirable thread.
Certainly, there is undesirable speech; but it’s the right of the individual to speak it. We have now started to punish the exercising of ones rights and where will it end?
I certainly see the writing on the wall; given enough opportunity, government will make any objection to it’s policies a crime as well. How long before the fairness doctrine and other controls eliminate any source that so much as voices an opposing thought?
It only seems that the more regulations or laws that are instilled to make us conform to the speech or thought police, the more violations we seemingly have to regulate.

By: Ken Sack

Ken Sack — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:18:12 +0000

Hate, like all emotions is a lightening quick moral assessment. When emotions are condemned, it is moral assessment that is condemned. In other words, the message is that passing moral judgment is the greatest crime. Karen Horney in her classic book “Neurosis and Human growth”, poses the “problem” of people wanting to commit crimes, but being afraid of the consequences. The “solution”? A moral blank check – no one pass moral judgment on crimes. These so called hates laws are the product of a lawless, hedonistic, hippy culture.

By: David Furnival

David Furnival — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:50:34 +0000

There is also a similar precedent in major sports, often Football managers are fined by the F.A or referees assosciation for critisms on decisions. These ruling bodies of the sport give out punishments in a bid to stop decent and to set an example to others in a bid to stamp out critism. Also they site the effect that critism and negative comments would have on ‘grass roots’ in the sport.
The point I’m building up to is that in general most people think that censorship and punishment against negative opinions is a natural or good thing in society and governments see this in our sporting bodies. This has softened the publics attitude already to censorship and decenting opinion leaving it easier for government to pass ‘hate crime’ type laws.
Excuse the rather long winded analogy. Thanks
David Furnival / U K