When I read the book 1984 by George Orwell, 1984 seemed a long way from reality – both the chronological year, and the concept of Big Brother and the “Thought Police”.  I won’t tell you when I first read it – hint: the book was written in 1949 – but many years later, the actual year 1984 did come and innocently went with nary a hint of the Thought Police.

No, they stayed under the radar until 1990, when George H.W. Bush signed into law the “Hate Crimes Statistics Act”.  The act required the Attorney General to gather and publish statistics on crimes based on “hate”.  Although I opposed the bill, it seemed so innocuous at the time and so much else was going on, I didn’t write any letters opposing it.  But in 1994, when Bill Clinton signed the “Violent Crime Control Act”, I hear the thought police panting with anticipation.  This bill allowed judges to increase sentencing for crimes deemed to be motivated by hate.  Federal judges and juries would now be required to read the minds of criminals.

Sidebar

Although I have been increasingly critical of George W. Bush in recent years, during his 2000 presidential campaign I wrote him expressing my full support of his reaction to the James Byrd murder – the black man dragged behind a car in Jasper, Texas.  Mr. Bush was being accused of racism for not supporting hate crime legislation in Texas.  In his response to my letter, he reiterated that “…we don’t need tougher laws.  We need to equally and fairly execute the laws we have.”

After all, two of Byrd’s murderers were sentenced to death and the third to life in prison.  What more could we do to them?  Castration is widely considered to be unconstitutional!

End sidebar

Since 1994, various states have enacted laws mandating enhanced punishment if “hate” is deemed the underlying motive.  These laws ignore the fact that a heterosexual who is beaten and robbed is just as injured as is a homosexual victim.  Or an that 82 year-old man is no more a victim of mugging than the 56-year old woman assaulted by the same criminal.  In my opinion, punishment should be “enhanced” for all victims, not just a protected class of politically correct victims.

Another sidebar

My thanks to Chuck Colson who sent me the following information:

In 2005 (the latest year available), out of 863,000 cases of aggravated assault nationwide, just 177 cases were crimes of bias against homosexuals – far less than even 1 percent.  What justifies longer sentencing for the attackers of these 177 than for the attackers of the 863,000?

End another sidebar

But empowered by the lack of public outrage by freeborn Americans, the thought police didn’t stop there.  Thumbing their collective nose in true Big Brotherhood style, they now want control over not just “hate crimes” but “bad thoughts” as well – and they get to determine what thoughts qualify as bad.

Consider the following:

The French legislature fined two of its members for criticizing the homosexual agenda during debate. 

Or Sweden where a pastor was jailed for 30 days for offending homosexuals after he delivered a sermon on the duty of Christians to “love the person” while not condoning the sin of sexual immorality. 

Or the British couple who were refused a pending adoption because their Christian faith might prejudice them against a possible gay child.

Or the two Australia men prosecuted for holding a seminar to educate Christians on Muslim beliefs.

Or Dr. James Dobson, who has to edit out of his Canadian broadcasts any commentary on homosexuality. 

The list goes on, but before you say “Yes, but that couldn’t happen in America”, don’t forget that Justice Anthony Kennedy and former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor have already cited foreign law and court decisions in their written Supreme Court opinions. 

“But,” you say, “we have the First Amendment.  It would never hold up in court.”

Oh really?  Just last week, the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed a decision won by the City of Oakland, California. 

A group of city employees had been using the city’s e-mail system and bulletin boards to advocate gay rights activities and express their political views on gay rights.  In response, members of the “Good News Employee Association” (GNEA) put out a flyer advertising their group as “a forum for people of Faith to express their views on the contemporary issues of the day, with respect for the Natural Family, Marriage and Family Values.”

Those phrases – “Natural Family” and “Marriage and Family Values” – were deemed by the City of Oakland to be inflammatory and as such tantamount to a hate crime.  They were denied access to either the e-mail system or the bulletin boards used by the gay rights group, and their flyers were confiscated and destroyed.  GNEA was told to cease and desist, while the Gay right advocates were allowed to continue accessing both.

Hopefully, this decision by the 9^th Circuit Court will be appealed.  (This is why Supreme Court appointments are so important.)

In the mean time, two months ago, the House passed H.R. 1592 the “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act”.  It is now in the Senate Judiciary Committee. 

Among other things, the bill authorizes the Attorney General to prosecute violations of state or local hate crime laws at the request of the local officials.  Thus the Federal government could prosecute a Minister in New Jersey for preaching a sermon that may cause a gay member of his congregation “annoyance or alarm”.

“But,” you say, “they wouldn’t do that.  That can’t be the intent of the bill.”

In an attempt to assure this wouldn’t happen, Representative Mike Pence from Indiana authored an amendment protecting the freedom of religion: “Nothing in this section limits the religious freedom of any person or group under the Constitution.” 

The amendment was defeated because that is indeed the intent of the bill.

It can’t happen here?  It’s already started. 

1984 was just a little late in arriving!