My position is that any crime should be punished according to the crime, not by the perpetrators gender, orientation, race, creed or religion or by what the judge deems was the accused’s emotional state when the crime occurred.

Suppose someone you love commits a random crime and the victim turns out to be gay, but they honestly did not know that when it happened.

Then the hate crimes law doesn’t apply.

You “sympathize with libertarianism”. Why? Should you not feel sorry for yourself as well. Suppose someone you love commits a random crime and the victim turns out to be gay, but they honestly did not know that when it happened. Do you want the perpetrator to receive greater punishment because their victim was gay and the judge believes this is why it happened? In today’s world, that is what would happen. In tomorrow’s world, it may be if the crime is against a Christian female or it may be assumed that it was a hate crime if the perpetrator is gay. Is this really what liberals want?

My position is that any crime should be punished according to the crime, not by the perpetrators gender, orientation, race, creed or religion or by what the judge deems was the accused’s emotional state when the crime occurred.

How can the prosecuting attorney, the jury, or a judge know what a person is thinking if not by their speech?

This is part of the libertarian argument. I sympathize with libertarianism, but sometimes it just doesn’t seem to me to cope with the real world, where hate crimes are a reality, and for the sake of whole communities of victims, should be treated differently than other crimes.

I suggest many crimes are motivated by hatred, but just how do you determine a person’s thoughts and heart? This is dangerous ground that the democrats are treading on. Not just dangerous for the Christian or the conservative. This is dangerous for every citizen. Who is to say that one hundred years from now, or whatever number it turns out to be, society has a new political correctness standard. The standard always changes over time. At that time, the law may be used to control the thought and speech of the homosexuals or the liberals, the very people it was written to protect.

When the government begins to legislate morality and speech, it is dangerous for everyone and there is no way around this being a speech control issue.

3) CONSTRUCTION AND APPLICATION.—
Nothing in this division, or an amendment made by this division, shall be construed or applied in a manner that infringes any rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Nor shall anything in this division, or an amendment made by this division, be construed or applied in a manner that substantially burdens a person’s exercise of religion (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), speech, expression, or association, unless the Government demonstrates that application of the burden to the person is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest, if such exercise of religion, speech, expression, or association was not intended to—
(A) plan or prepare for an act of physical violence; or
(B) incite an imminent act of physical violence against another.
(4) FREE EXPRESSION.—
Nothing in this division shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual’s expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs or solely upon an individual’s membership in a group advocating or espousing such beliefs.
(5) FIRST AMENDMENT.—
Nothing in this division, or an amendment made by this division, shall be construed to diminish any rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(6) CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.—
Nothing in this division shall be construed to prohibit any constitutionally protected speech, expressive conduct or activities (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), including the exercise of religion protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and peaceful picketing or demonstration. The Constitution of the United States does not protect speech, conduct or activities consisting of planning for, conspiring to commit, or committing an act of violence.