Since the vote on the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act is scheduled for the full House tomorrow, I took a moment to review the arguments that the opposition is making against the bill. Honestly, they aren't that good of arguments, and I'm kind of surprised. I remember this being one of those things that had two logical sides to it, that many people I knew had their own real reasons to be against hate crimes legislation. Of course, I never bothered to ask what those were, and now that everyone opposed to such legislation has come out with their talking points, I'm left thinking Is this the best you've got?
Consider their top arguments:
- Hate crimes legislation means that people in one group will get more protection under the law.
- Hate crimes legislation will ban Jesus.
- Hate crimes legislation punishes people's thought or speech.
- Hate crimes don't happen very often.
- Hate crimes legislation forces people to accept the homosexual lifestyle.
So as it goes to the full House tomorrow, I'm wondering what the opponents of the legislation will say. Most likely, they'll repeat those same tired arguments and hope that no one's really paying attention, or, if they are, they're OK with those specific lies and misrepresentations. I'm waiting to hear what, if anything, Dan Burton, my representative, will say about his vote.
What is there left to say?