Gina Miller
April 30, 2014
Democrats propose trolling media, internet for "hate speech"
By Gina Miller

Listen to an audio version of this column

As we know, leaders of the anti-freedom, Godless Left would love nothing more than to outlaw speech that is critical of their tyrannical agenda. We have seen Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) illegally use the Internal Revenue Service as a weapon to hinder the political speech and activity of Patriot groups that oppose him. We have heard plenty of Democrats call for a return of the unconstitutional "Fairness Doctrine." We have even heard moonbats call for the criminal prosecution of those who speak against the hoax of man-made global warming, "climate change deniers," as we're stupidly called.

We have also repeatedly warned that unconstitutional "hate crimes" laws would inevitably lead to laws against what is labeled as "hate speech." Naturally, those on the Left have ridiculed such warnings, claiming that could never happen. As usual, the Left is wrong.

A couple of weeks ago, two Democrats in Congress introduced a bill titled, "The Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014." It directs the creation of a report on "the role of telecommunications in hate crimes." The report would be compiled by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), the Justice Department, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and others, and would:

... analyze information on the use of telecommunications, including the Internet, broadcast television and radio, cable television, public access television, commercial mobile services, and other electronic media, to advocate and encourage violent acts and the commission of crimes of hate, as described in the Hate Crime Statistics Act...

The bill directs that the report:

... include any recommendations, consistent with the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, that the NTIA determines are appropriate and necessary to address the use of telecommunications...

What would these people consider to be advocating and encouraging violent acts and "hate crimes"? The bill provides no definitions, so we are left to presume this nebulous "hate speech," which is all we can call it, is in the eye of the Justice Department and other groups involved in compiling the report.

What do they mean when they direct the report commission to make "appropriate" recommendations in answer to its "hate speech" findings? Recommendations (which they claim should be in line with the First Amendment) for what? What they're doing is already out of line with the First Amendment. What is the point in searching for speech in the media and on the Internet that might cause "hate crimes" if you do not intend to somehow try to crush it?

Don't doubt for a minute that this is yet another move toward outlawing speech that the tyrants in charge want silenced. Any speech that is critical of the communist Left's agenda is in their cross-hairs. They can make a "hate speech" case against any sentiment they don't like. If you cite the biblical admonitions against homosexuality, they can claim that your words could cause someone to commit acts of violence. They can make this kind of claim about any speech that goes against their anti-American schemes.

We already have laws against making terroristic threats, and the constitutionality of such laws can be debated, but that's not what this bill is about, is it? No. This bill is about targeting speech that could be construed as advocating violence or the commission of "hate crimes," a patently unconstitutional concept that provides for unequal protection under the law of specially protected groups of people. As I already noted, these leftists in power, who are masters of twisting the meaning of words, can easily ascribe violent intentions to most any speech with which they disagree, even speech that is purely biblical. Thus, this bad bill should be strongly opposed by defenders of liberty, because of the intended consequences that are clearly discernible. What starts out today as the compiling of an "innocent" report on "hate speech," can tomorrow morph into the official silencing of those in opposition to the tyrannical agenda of the Godless Left.

© Gina Miller

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

 

Alan Keyes
Why de facto government (tyranny) is replacing the Constitution (Apr. 2015)

Stephen Stone
Will Obama be impeached now that Republicans control both houses of Congress? (Nov. 2014)

Cliff Kincaid
Democrats' racist roots examined in new film

Larry Klayman
Hillary and race baiters will be held to account

James Lambert
Sadly, Forbes, SI Magazines in recent issues make light, even promote recreational pot legalization

Marsha West
Would Jesus refer to certain people on Trump's Christian Advisory Committee as serpents and hypocrites?

J. Matt Barber
Trump must pledge to implement GOP Platform

Lloyd Marcus
Three simple reasons why Trump will win

Judie Brown
Catholic and pro-abortion?

Rev. Austin Miles
Tim LaHaye's death--sadness on earth--JOY in heaven

Michael Gaynor
Donald Trump needs Wendy Long to replace Chuck Schumer

Alan Keyes
If you reject Trump, will you elect Hillary? Bible says no

Tom Hoefling
The dog that didn't bark: Solving the mystery of what Donald Trump is all about

Wes Vernon
GOP Convention sets table for November showdown
  More columns

Cartoons


Michael Ramirez
More cartoons

RSS feeds

News:
Columns:

Columnists

Matt C. Abbott
Chris Adamo
Russ J. Alan
Bonnie Alba
Jamie Freeze Baird
Chuck Baldwin
Kevin J. Banet
J. Matt Barber
. . .
[See more]

Sister sites