LAC News
Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Hate Crimes Legislation Attached to Department of Defense Re-Authorization Bill
By LAC Staff
August 2007

Recent political maneuvering by Senators Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) and Gordon Smith (R-Oregon) would have put President George W. Bush between the proverbial “rock and a hard place.”  By attaching an amendment dealing with “hate crimes” to the Department of Defense (DOD) Re-Authorization Bill (H.R. 1585), Senators Kennedy and Smith would have forced the President into a dilemma.  Either the President sign H.R. 1585, thereby funding American military forces but affirming hate crimes legislation, or veto the bill, defeating hate crimes efforts but also delaying critically needed funding for American soldiers.   

While the DOD Re-Authorization Bill was ultimately pulled from the Senate floor, such sneaky tactics on the part of the aforementioned senators speak to their persistence in seeking to advance the homosexual agenda.  Rather than moving a stand-alone hate crimes bill which they knew was deeply controversial, Senators Kennedy and Smith elected to tack their harmful amendment (Amendment 2067) onto an essential piece of legislation.  Because we are at war and have troops in harms way, attaching such unrelated legislation to a bill that provides critical funding to our men and women serving our country is deplorable.  Hate crimes legislation warrants continued opposition regardless of what games liberal senators play. 

Hate crimes legislation seeks to create a special, federally protected class for those who self identify as homosexual, bisexual, transvestite, and “transgender” or “transsexual”.  Ironically, the amendment would have created inequality in the meting out of justice by emphasizing the protection of sexually defined groups over other individuals.  Hate crimes legislation further creates a new category of crime for actions alleged to be motivated by prejudice against someone based on their “sexual orientation” or “gender identity.” Thus, hate crimes laws would require police officers to attempt to subjectively ascertain the thoughts and opinions underlying certain crimes; something law enforcement officials agree is beyond the scope of law enforcement abilities.  

While essentially creating a civil right for a changeable behavior, hate crimes legislation also is likely to result in the criminalization of any speech that is critical of the homosexual lifestyle.  In Europe and Canada, hate crimes laws have been used to intimidate pastors, religious leaders, and concerned citizens who attempt to publicly criticize homosexual or bisexual behavior.  The potential for similar coercion and suppression of widely held viewpoints in the United States strikes at the very heart of American’s First Amendment liberties. 

Furthermore, allowing the Federal Government to legislate in the area of hate crimes gives the Federal Government the opportunity to intervene in the details of state and local law enforcement.  By politicizing criminal law, Senator Kennedy and Senator Smith were cynical in their attempt to pass a hate crimes amendment that would have forced police forces to direct their limited resources toward trying to divine whether certain crimes were motivated by “bias” or “hateful thought.” 

The United States Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law for all people as clearly delineated by the Fourteenth Amendment.  Thus, the necessity of Senator Kennedy’s and Senator Smith’s amendment (or any future attempt at passing hate crimes legislation) is dubious to begin with, despite their arguments and the clamorous support of their seventeen co-sponsors.  Attempting to advance special rights for homosexuals at the expense of American troops in harms’ way further discredits their cause.