Jump to Content
welcome to my brain. come, have a seat.

{ Email Connor }

Welcome to the blog of Connor Boyack, a 20-something husband, web designer, Latter-day Saint, constitutionalist, paleocon, classical liberal, preparedness practitioner, budding philanthropist, and master's student of political economy. I'm from Poway, CA but live in Happy Valley.


blog RSS feed

Political Blogging as Hate Crime

Posted by Connor on November 21st, 2006

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

free speech

This website has a post concerning the Democrats and an anti-”hate speech” bill that may soon be a topic of legislation when the new Demo-controlled Congress takes action.

If Rev. Ted Pike is correct, this blog may soon be illegal.

“For the past eight years, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith has tried unsuccessfully to pass its Orwellian federal ‘anti-hate’ bill. It has failed largely for one reason: Republican control of Congress,” writes Pike. “Repeatedly, Republican opponents of their hate bill, such as Rep. Roy Blunt and Sen. Bill Frist have been able, with Republican congressional backing, to block passage,” but now, with Democrats in control of Congress, “such freedom-saving clout no longer exists. ADL’s federal thought crimes bill, ‘The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act,’ will be reintroduced soon after January 1. Since no Democrat in Congress has ever voted against the hate bill, it will pass.”

Orwellian indeed. Democrats seem to support such a bill, so it’s likely to pass with near flying colors once the new Congress is in session. Where will the line be drawn? How much dissent will be tolerated? Will free speech rights be trampled, as critics label certain remarks as “hate filled”, bigoted, racist, sexist, or otherwise? I was accused in a recent post of having a hate-filled position and vilifying others—though I adamantly deny that neither is true and the person’s accusation was never substantiated. But will certain remarks—now only considered taboo or frowned upon—be illegal?

“[Akdeniz] said ‘continental European countries such as Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Hungary, Austria and Belgium have strong anti-hate laws, which have resulted in the imprisonment of hate-mongers. In Holland, 657 websites were removed. And in Germany, more than 700 hate websites were shut down.’”

Similar behavior was prevented in America, where the Constitution and the Bill of Rights once held sway. However, now that the ADL-friendly Democrats are ruling the roost, we may see America go the way of Europe, eradicating web sites and blogs that not only criticize Israel but also homosexuality and other subjects that often elicit contentious debate.

I’m very eager to read any related legislation that will see the light of day in Congress…

Possibly related posts:

2 comments so far. Care to chime in?

I have to think that for such a law to get through there must be an element of ‘incite to action’ in the website for it to be shut down. Of course then we get to waltz into the question of that huge gray area, being where is the line between free expression and inciting to illegal action. Some would argue that any comment critical of a racial/ethnic/gender/orientation/etc group, even if made in isolation would further validate the calls of those who seek actions (illegal) against such group. There is no objective way to outline it; it’s all in the eye of the beholder, no mea culpa needed…

Man, it’s a trixie pixie, for sure.

#1 Naiah Earhart on November 21st, 2006

On a related note, it looks like the not-so-esteemed John McCain has proposed some legislation along these lines.

#2 Connor on December 15th, 2006

Post a comment

Name (required)

Email (required)

URL

what's new

Featuring 615 posts w/ 7,586 comments.

Search the blog
[ Sitemap ]
Recent Comments RSS feed
Most Commented
Recent Posts
Aaaaarchives