Although I ought to be developing some kind of immunity to the absurdities that I see in the news these days I am still occasionally astonished. Today was one of those days.
The very first bit of news I saw on TV today was a report on a college student who is being charged with a felony hate-crime after he allegedly threw a Koran into a toilet. I completely agree that putting a Koran in a toilet is more than disrespectful. I have a very difficult time, however, stretching that into any kind of crime, let alone a hate-crime. I listened with interest as a legal "expert" for the network explained that the student's action could conceivably cause Muslims in America to fear for their safety while walking on the streets of this country. As a result of that potential fear, it qualified as a hate-crime. I'd like to ask that attorney if she would consider the defacing of a Holy Bible, the desecration of religious displays (Christian), burning the U.S. flag as hate crimes. I suspect that she would describe those as contitutionally protected expressions of free speech.
Her assertion that the defacing of a Koran might cause Muslims to fear for their safety is interesting when compared to to the people who were frightened by the behavior of the twelve Imams at an airport some months ago. Passenger complaints to the airline caused the removal of the twelve Imams from their flight. The Imams are now trying to sue the airline and discover the names of the passengers who complained so that they can sue them as well. Compare the two cases. Does this seem like equal justice to you?
Would justice be better served if the twelve Imams were charged with felony hate-crimes because their actions frightend their fellow passengers? Is praying in an airport a crime? Is speaking out against U.S. policy in Iraq a crime? As disturbing as their behavior may have been I don't thing it's criminal activity.
If it causes reasonable people to fear for their safety, however, according to the attorney on this mornings newscast, it should qualify as a hate-crime. That would seem equal even if it didn't seem like real justice. Does the constitution guarantee equal injustice? The whole thing is just nuts?
It seems that the unwritten, unspoken qualifier for something to be considered a hate-crime is that it must first and foremost be an act committed by a white anglo-saxon male.
Just an observation.......
Join me this Thursday, August 2nd, at 7 PM on WDCM Radio, 97.5 FM to consider this and other issues. My guest this week will be Stanley Jackson.
