- I hate all the new talk about hate speech legislation.
I hate any effort to make any speech a criminal offense, unless perhaps
it emanates from the mouth of Tom Cruise. Or if it involves threat or incitement
to kill or riot. But there are already laws covering such things.
-
- I hate hate speech, but I hate worse any effort to create
laws against it. The thing is, people love to hate. Ask Rush Limbaugh.
No, don't. Just listen to him. Behind the pose of fairness: hate, hate,
hate, sneer, sneer, sneer. Ask Bill Maher. No pose of fairness there, just
hate, hate, hate, sneer, sneer, sneer.
-
- Of course, I like Maher's forthright hate a lot more
than Limbaugh's disguised hate. That's my hateful taste. That makes me
a hate hypocrite to some, I guess, and they can hate me for it. Bon apetit!
In this country, we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
hatred.
-
- Especially since Dick "Go F--- Yourself" Cheney
and George W. "He's a major-league a------" Bush took over.
-
- But I digress. Hate when I do that.
-
- I hate a lot of things about the Local Law Enforcement
Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005 (HR3132, Senate bill1145), which the
House passed in September. First, I hate the fact that it is necessary
at all. I hate the fact that people get so hateful that they insult, assault,
injure, and kill. Of course, if you are going to engage in those things,
it's a lot easier to do it with hate than without.
-
- But I digress again! Hate when that happens.
-
- The thing I really hate about S. 1145 is that it sounds
nice and noble, but hides something potentially hateful. That is, if you
do not hate the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and general licentiousness---er,
freedom---guaranteed in this country.
-
- It hides the fact that the federal government will have
the right to not only prosecute hate speech, but to decide what hate speech
is. Yes, I know it's a "hate crimes" bill, not "hate speech,"
but guess what? I even hate the term "hate crime."
-
- After all, what crime is committed without hatred? Jaywalking.
Maybe.
-
- If a gay person, or a black person, or any sort of person
is attacked, injured, or murdered---on the basis of bigotry and resentment---how
is that different from a person attacked, injured, murdered on the basis
of fifty bucks in a wallet? Tell a robbery or rape victim that they have
not been subjected to a hate crime, and I'll bet they'll just hate hearing
that.
-
- Crime is an act of hatred. Hatred of law, or hatred of
perceived injustices, hatred of personal circumstances, hatred of society.
And I hate having to state anything so painfully obvious.
-
- But I digress yet again. Don't you just hate that?
-
- In Canada, "hate speech"---defined as advocating
genocide or racial hatred---can get you fourteen years in prison, which
is a pretty hateful place. In the UK, inciting racial animisoty can get
you seven years. Hmmm. So if I move to Canada and I go nuts and start blogging
about getting rid of all men in business suits, they can throw me in the
clink. Never mind how improved the world might be.
-
- Okay, frankly, I agree that anybody who goes on-line,
or on the street with a sign, or on the airwaves or rooftops or hires a
blimp and advocates genocide or racial animosity. . .should be prosecuted.
For something. Loitering, creating a public nuisance, inciting to riot,
disturbing the peace (now there's a law I'd like to see enforced!) Or at
least their internet/TV station/blimp plug should be pulled or sign torn
up. I hate 'em. But what of televangelists like the sinister D. James Kennedy,
a church-as state advocate who broadcasts extremely hateful, inflammatory
political propaganda every Sunday morning under the cover of religion?*
See my point? When is hate hate, and when is hate just a point of view?
-
- And do you want those nuts in D.C. to decide?
-
- Of course, this new bill was supported by esteemed elected
representatives who claim they really hate "hate crimes" and
"hate speech." That these things just fill them with hatred,
and who can blame them?
-
- The problem is that we are in the midst of a particularly
hateful time when hateful people have taken over the government, and want
to do hateful things like limit freedoms under the pretense of protecting
the country from hateful terrorists.
-
- These people---and their special interest controllers---will
really support S.1145, because this means they can pretty much define "hate
speech" as they like, and arrest people for speaking it. And then
they can invite the all the good folks out there to hate those nasty hateful
people, too.
-
- All of you readers who are now saying, "oh, they'd
hate to do anything like that," let me remind you of the woman who
was not allowed to fly in a commercial jetliner recently because she wore
a humorous T-shirt expressing hate for "President" Bush. Let
me remind you of a bill pending in Indiana that says if you have a child
out of wedlock that you will be criminally prosecuted---apparently for
hating marriage. Let me remind you that White House advisor Karl Christian
Rove (put that middle name in quotes) called ordinary citizen/mom Cindy
Sheehan---a heartbroken woman who is protesting a war that killed her son,
that killed her son---a "clown."
-
- And let me remind you of Hate Central, which you are
looking at right now.
-
- Yes, people who love to hate have found paradise in a
computer screen, enabling them to type the most vile, vindictive, vituperative,
vexacious viciousness imaginable. No, it is quite beyond imaginable. You
hate it---the Internet loves it.
-
- If you are now thinking that "hate speech"
laws could become a means of government censorship of the 'net, well, then,
you are thinking.
-
- Which reminds me, I've got to get busy hating before
the government takes away my right to do so. You know, the government that
claims to oppose "big government" but has done more to interfere
with civil rights and freedom than any administration in U.S. history;
that is spending hundreds of billions of dollars on Iraq while U.S. education
goes to hell, the middle class withers away, poverty enters deep-rot, and
corporations run rampant over conciousness and environment. Okay, I'm warmed
up now, so here goes. . .
-
- I hate pit-bulls, and Rottweilers. I hate Bush's beady,
self-righteous little eyeballs. I hate warm coffee, and soup that is too
hot, and the fact that newspapers have forgotten that they are supposed
to be hard-hitting and largely local. I really, really hate demographics
and marketing people and their profession---more than I can express---and
the grip they have on culture. I hate the way they say they are just giving
the public what it wants, when in fact they are pandering to whatever the
public will respond to on an animal level. When their only goal is to make
money, regardless of the impact of any given product on society.
-
- I hate the crotch-level jeans that all women seem to
be wearing. They destroy all grace in the female figure, and turn lithe
physiques into segmented bug-bodies. I hate the fact that it takes Oprah
Winfrey to get people to read, and that most of what they read is demographically
designed crap, anyhow. I really, really, really hate movie previews---their
hypertrophic volume, cataclysmic sound effects that are actually physical
assaults, and that Voice of Satan guy who does all the narration for every
new film. Eww!
-
- I hate the fact that the "president" can get
away with nominating ardent extreme-right "Christian" ideologues
for the Supreme Court. I hate that these nominees refuse the answer the
only germane questions asked---about their politics. I hate the fact that
if I spend five minutes in a Starbucks, my pores reek of coffee. I hate
"grinders" and the infernal noise they make as they try endlessly
to flip a skateboard on to a sidewalk curb. I think it's the second stupidest
"sport" ever dreamed up, right after soccer.
-
- Oh, and um. . .if I could express the sheer contempt
I feel for cigarette smokers, well, I'd be a hell of a writer. I mean,
suck that poison smoke in. . .blow that poison smoke out. . .suck that
poison smoke in. . .now look romantic. . .Suckers. I hate almost all sitcoms,
of course, but I admit they might be funny if you have Down's Syndrome
or cannot speak English.
-
- I hate the fact that one of the astronauts recently remarked
that the air's atmospheric layer is visibly thinner than it was twenty
years ago, and that this barely made a headline. I hate anyone talking
on a cell phone, driving or otherwise. I hate the obsession with cars,
cars, cars.
-
- I hate Michael Jackson's parents, and people who do not
say "hello" on sidewalks, and people who do not respond to polite
letters or e-mail, and people who equate courtesy with weakness. I hate
bitchiness. I hate the fact that a very reputable and plugged-in animation
consultant wanted two grand up-front to shop my children's fable. Two grand!
(I turned him down.) I really hate all those "country" singers
with those stupid, stupid black hats. I think they should all be rounded
up, put into "detention facilities," and made to go hatless.
I cannot begin to convey the profound hatred I feel for the L.A. Times
editor who un-hired me as a columnist (after another had hired me) because,
and I quote, "we have too many white male columnists here."
-
- I hate tattoos, especially those at the base of women's
spines. I absolutely hate religious fanaticism of any sort, and I revile
blind nationalism. I hate that a former friend of mine once declared, "I
can't think of a better reason to invade another country than to take its
oil." I hate "The View," and Rupert Murdoch, and SUV's.
I think SUV drivers should be rounded up, put into "detention facilities,"
and made to walk twenty miles per day. I hate the phoney "war on terrorism,"
and the lies that come from Washington with every single act and public
statement. I hate the complacency of the citizens of this country.
-
- And, well, I really hate to go on like this.
-
- * Just about half of each Kennedy broadcast is flagrantly
political, often involving distorted and false assertions about the ACLU.
Quote from Kennedy: "As Vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly
dominion and influence over our schools, government, literature, and news
media and our scientific endeavors -- in short, over every aspect and institution
of human society."
-
-
- Comment
- Jim Mortellaro
- 10-17-5
-
- I hate to say this, honest I do ... but I hate Rip. I
hate him because he makes the rest of us aspiring writers look so bad.
Don't - you - hate it when that happens? I do.
-
- Take for instance, this hate piece. I hate it. I hate
it because not only does Rip roar in a rant (izzat alliteration or asinine??),
ah, ... where wuz I? Oh, yeah, I hate it because not only does Rip roar
in a rant, but it's so funny (which I also hate) and because it conveys
his meaning so swell.
-
- Dammit, Rip ... this is purely nepotism! You and Jeff
should be ashamed of yourselves.
-
- Let OUR people rip. Tear Rip down. Make him frown. And
Jeff... chame, chame chame for using your site to promote this ... this
... upstart lil' brudder of yours whilst we who write a little less goodly
can't even get a stinking Comment up on Rense.Com.
-
- Down with Rip. Gosh, I hate that dooood.
-
- Jim Mortellaro
- Morty@MortysCabin.Net
- http://www.mortyscabin.net
-
-
- Comment
- Richard
- 10-18-5
-
- Hate Crime Laws As Orwellian Love
-
- By Founders America
- ©1994
-
- The Op/Ed Page of the Richmond Times-Dispatch published
a column on February 11th, 1994, headlined "Hate Crimes Can Be Punished
Without Suppressing Speech," by Mr. Craig Sumberg, director of the
National Capital Region of the American Jewish Congress, which supports
passage of Hate Crimes legislation HB 889, in Virginia.
- Webster's dictionary defines "hate" as a "strong
feeling of dislike for a person or thing." In effect, HB 889 is an
attempt to assign extra punishment for any "bad" feelings one
may hold about others, or about things which relate to others' sexual,
racial, ethnic, or religious identity.
-
- Because thinking naturally evokes feelings, punishing
one for what one feels punishes one's thinking. This is the reason why
punishing "hate" -- or thought -- is an attempt to control and
suppress free speech.
-
- Hate crime laws do suppress free speech.
-
- If a man is given extra punishment because of his thoughts,
which may or may not have been motive for his crime, then pretrial discovery
must necessarily include finding "bad" speech to support that
extra punishment; it involves interviewing his friends and co-workers,
inspecting his library and video rental records, determining what newsletters
and magazines he likes and any organizations he belongs to, in order to
establish what he might have thought before and during his crime. It requires
Gestapo-like searches by Thought Police.
-
- The eventual result of such legislation will be prosecutors
rifling the personal thoughts of any white suspect alleged to have perpetrated
a crime against a minority person.
-
- Moreover, to be fair, it would necessarily demand that
minority suspects be investigated to uncover their "bad" thoughts
about whites, whom they may have targeted for assault, rape, robbery, or
murder--a far more prevalent array of "hate crimes."
-
- A man may have no intention of harming another person,
but because he can't predict whether a situation might arise involving
an altercation with someone not of his sexual orientation or race or religion,
he would be imprudent to speak openly to friends and co-workers about his
politics; nor should he checkout library books or rent videos which might
give clues to his thinking; nor should he join any of the many organizations
which are sex-, race-, ethnic- or religion-based.
-
- HB 889 is a thought-control bill, adding more punishment
for what one thinks and believes. What one thinks and believes may drive
one to break laws for the benefit of a perceived greater good--such as
men who claim to hate abortion-clinic killings of wombed babies; hate predatory
homosexuals' Man/boy clubs; or hate certain minorities' bad influence on
civil society.
-
- In all three instances the perceived "hate"
is really political thought, which moral men might act upon. Where one
man sees bigotry another sees truth. All thinking must be protected from
punishment. If thinking prompts men toward unlawful conduct, then punish
them for what they do -- not for their thinking -- no matter how distasteful
the Thought Police find their ideas to be.
-
- Thinking is the fundamental impetus for speech; ergo,
"bad" thinking -- spoken or written -- must be protected.
-
- If one's thoughts are linked to unlawful conduct, and
if extra punishment is meted out by the State for those thoughts, then
all thinking is at risk for control by Thought Police.
-
- Their faulty reasoning aside, the Left's call for "love"--
which they claim motivates their Hate Crimes legislation -- is means for
disarming rational thought and advancing liberals' emotion-based agenda.
-
- It is really tyranny.
-
- Love untempered with reason is more often destructive
than constructive, as with the "love" that liberal enablers apply
in keeping America's poor dependent and chained to liberals' "help."
-
- With their passage of hate-crime laws, liberals undermine
the Constitution and punish America with their Orwellian love.
-
- -Founders' America
|
